# The XM/Sirius Merger News Thread



## Nick

February 19, 2007

According to the NY Post, XMSR and Sirius will announce a merger as early as today. 
Both Sirius and XM trade near multi-year lows as their subscriber growth decelerates
and they face competition from new consumer electronics devices like the Apple iPod.

The companies each has over $1 billion in debt.

A consolidation is seen as way to save hundreds of million of dollars in redundant costs,
but the FCC may block a merger which could end competition in the sat radio business.

Source: http://www.247wallst.com/2007/02/xm_and_sirius_t.html


----------



## Richard King

I find it interesting that they would select today, a day when the market is closed, to make such an announcement.

As a shareholder, I say . As an XM customer I say . It took an email to XM CEO Hugh Panero to solve the problems that I was having with billing a while back and I was able to say that if it wasn't fixed I would go to the competition. That ability won't be there anymore.


----------



## FTA Michael

NY Post agrees: http://www.nypost.com/seven/02192007/business/heavenly_deal_business_peter_lauria.htm

Although "Talks were still going on at press time and the deal could fall apart at any time."


----------



## DonCorleone

Richard King said:


> I find it interesting that they would select today, a day when the market is closed, to make such an announcement.
> 
> As a shareholder, I say . As an XM customer I say . It took an email to XM CEO Hugh Panero to solve the problems that I was having with billing a while back and I was able to say that if it wasn't fixed I would go to the competition. That ability won't be there anymore.


Often announcements are made pre- or post-market so as not to artificially impact stocks in 1 way or another, so a closed day would be a similar strategy.

As for the competition threat, there's always threatening to go terrestrial.


----------



## La Push Commercial Codman

Sirius Satellite Radio had a cash flow, xm satellite radio didn't. Even, if they merge, THE FCC has to O.K.AY the merge, which means, there's no reason to screw the xm satellite subs, or The Sirius satellite subs.. It is such a screw up for xm radio to consider this to be a merge. I have 3 years left in my xm contract:nono2: How is it going to be filled.. If, Sirius obtains xm, I will be screwed since, I already have Sirius satellite radio. A lousy fricken mistake, by these companies...

I betcha, what made them do it, was debt and pressure by the National Association of Broadcasters, holding there threats on both xm and Sirius, one of them saw the predictions. Screw the subs...


----------



## Stew

Fox just reported that the long talked about merger is about to happen.


----------



## James Long

It is going to take a while for them to get approval ... if they get it at all. Don't worry about your subscription ... something will be worked out by the time they merge.


----------



## harsh

There have been rumors from credible sources flying around since last summer.

Now that BMW is offering HD radio availability in their automotive line (and advertising it heavily), it would be a good time for a bold move.

As I see it, we could have this discussion each time a rumor pops up and it may never happen.


----------



## harsh

La Push Commercial Codman said:


> Even, if they merge, THE FCC has to O.K.AY the merge, which means, there's no reason to screw the xm satellite subs, or The Sirius satellite subs.


Probably no less of an issue, they would also have to get SEC approval.


----------



## CoriBright

Stew said:


> Fox just reported that the long talked about merger is about to happen.


A done deal...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17228226/


----------



## Mavrick

It is also on XM's website now also.

http://xmradio.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=press_releases&item=1423


----------



## bigpro

It's also up at sirius: http://investor.sirius.com/ReleaseDetail.cfm?ReleaseID=230306&cat=&newsroom=

There's always a winner and loser no matter what they say, so who is the winner here? I think it's Sirius. Sounds like XM stock is getting converted to Sirius stock, the CEO at Sirius will be the CEO of the new company, etc.
Hope they stick with the Sirius name-- much better-- but I think they may have to make up some new name since it officially has to be a "new company" (one company can't buy the other).


----------



## Nick

Now this from SkyReport:


> BREAKING NEWS: Sirius, XM to Merge in $13 Billion Deal
> 
> The companies made it official this afternoon: XM Satellite Radio and Sirius entered
> into a definitive agreement to merge operations in a deal valued at $13 billion, which
> includes net debt of about $1.6 billion.
> 
> Through the deal, XM shareholders will receive a fixed exchange ratio of 4.6 shares of
> Sirius common stock for each share of XM. XM and Sirius shareholders will each own
> about 50 percent of the combined company.
> 
> Sirius CEO Mel Karmazin will become CEO of the combined company and Gary Parsons,
> chairman of XM, will become chairman of the new entity. The new company's board of
> directors will consist of 12 directors, including Karmazin and Parsons, four independent
> members designated by each company, and a representative from General Motors and
> American Honda.
> 
> XM CEO Hugh Panero will continue in his current role until the expected close of the merger.
> 
> The companies said they will continue to operate independently until the transaction is
> completed and will work together to determine the combined company's corporate name
> and headquarters location prior to closing.
> 
> The dea is subject to regulatory approvals, including an OK from the FCC. It's the second
> big satellite deal the agency is working on, given its scrutiny of Liberty Media's takeover
> of DirecTV.


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## mscroggi

I dont see how anyone will benefit from this.. I am sure some major stockholders can make some money initially.. but the country as a whole cannot possibly benefit from a lack of competition.. I hope the FCC denies the request..


----------



## tedb3rd

So this means I'm going to get twice as many channels for the same price right??? ....same thing that would have happened if Dish & Direct would have been allowed to merge way back in the day. Right? Less competition leads to more competitive prices.... ( - :


----------



## waynenm

I also hope the FCC says "no". There is no benefit to no competition.


----------



## pinkertonfloyd

bigpro said:


> It's also up at sirius: http://investor.sirius.com/ReleaseDetail.cfm?ReleaseID=230306&cat=&newsroom=
> 
> There's always a winner and loser no matter what they say, so who is the winner here? I think it's Sirius. Sounds like XM stock is getting converted to Sirius stock, the CEO at Sirius will be the CEO of the new company, etc.
> Hope they stick with the Sirius name-- much better-- but I think they may have to make up some new name since it officially has to be a "new company" (one company can't buy the other).


I don't get "sirius" being the better name... XM always had a better ring to it.

While it look like Sirius is "buying" XM, it's still a merger, but XM on paper is worth almost 5 billion more (more capital investments, and less debt). Which is why the stock works out that way.

Personally, I'd bank on about a 30% chance of this occuring... and if it does, I'm sure Charles Ergen will be livid, since this is simular to the E* and D* merger a few years back.

As an XM subscriber, and an XM Shareholder... I'm not too happy.... I just hope that if this merger does go though, that Eric Logan is kept as the Programming VP. .. rather than Mel's former Viacom cronies...


----------



## pinkertonfloyd

tedb3rd said:


> So this means I'm going to get twice as many channels for the same price right??? ....same thing that would have happened if Dish & Direct would have been allowed to merge way back in the day. Right? Less competition leads to more competitive prices.... ( - :


Nope... I'm sure that the FCC will ask for the bandwidth back if approved, and/or require that the new company be held to FCC decency rules.

If that occurs, XM's hardware will be the winner, XM's use of aacPlus (MPEG 4 based) over PAC (MPEG 2 based) allows for more channels on the same bandwidth/SQ.

XM had a solution for extra bandwidth, but Sirius blocked it for 18 months, and let it die at the FCC. Funny but I'm sure they'd love it now.


----------



## pinkertonfloyd

tedb3rd said:


> So this means I'm going to get twice as many channels for the same price right??? ....same thing that would have happened if Dish & Direct would have been allowed to merge way back in the day. Right? Less competition leads to more competitive prices.... ( - :


I doubt the price will stay the same, Mel has been pushing to raise Sirius to $15/mo for some time. Mel is formully from Viacom, loves the Media industry bonehead... which is why he caved into the record companies over recording off-air on Sirius (XM was taking it to court)... the record companies are his buddies and pals...


----------



## waynenm

Well, apparently the FCC already said "unlikely" before the merger was announced: http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=5818
I have to guess it won't be approved, no matter how many billions of
dollars are thrown at it.


----------



## machavez00

So what does this mean for the "king of all media" and Opie and Anthony. O&A will most likely get canned considering all the money Sirius spent to get Howie


----------



## Stewart Vernon

I wonder about folks who have one or the other in their cars.. as I understood it, I didn't think the antennas were the same so I wonder which antenna configuration the merged company will use? Could be a lot of unhappy car owners who have an antenna that no longer works.

Unless they choose to simulcast both ways... which would sort of defeat the purpose of a merger.


----------



## caesar4831

I don't have a problem with the merger if it means I get football & baseball. Best of both worlds. And I would pay $15/month to get both!


----------



## magellanmtb

The other question, what happens to all the DirectV xm channels??


----------



## Kevin Dupuy

magellanmtb said:


> The other question, what happens to all the DirectV xm channels??


This is the forum to discuss just that on the DIRECTV forum.


----------



## Steve Mehs

Deja vu. A merger was announced and will be hopefully rejected, the government will not allow it. I look at the old E*/D* merger threads and laugh, it will be the same way with satellite radio.


----------



## James Long

Kinda premature to discuss which name and channels are going to survive ... The merger has to go through first!


----------



## Steve Mehs

Awe JL don't you remember the days of the DirecTV/Dish merger. The name of the company would be DirecTV, Charlie would be the head of the company. Yada yada yada. It was fun. It's never too early to make speculations that have almost zero chance of happening. Personally I'm excited about this 1) It will get satellite radio back in the news 2) After all this BS is said and done and rejected, it will be over, no more merger talk.

On my way to work tomorrow, I COULD get in a car accident and die, just like XM and Sirius COULD be one company.


----------



## allen98311

According to Sirius Backstage, there will be a conference call today at 8:30 on Sirius CH 122, and XM CH 200

Source:
http://www.siriusbackstage.com/2007/02/19/breaking-abc-news-confirms-sirius-xm-to-merge/


----------



## BillJ

Since the FCC is already on record as opposing a merger I'm confident the gov't will kill this deal. Then both satellite radio companies will go bankrupt and there will be no satellite radio service. Then all those people who bought vehicles with factory-installed satellite service will sue the auto companies for a refund and the auto companies will go broke. That will throw thousands out of work and they will be unable to pay their mortgages. The banks which made those loans will then go broke too. 

Isn't it nice to have the FCC protecting us?


----------



## Nick

*"...part of the deal includes an option for subscribers to pick their channels a la carte"*

Today's SkyReport:


> The day has come. As Wall Street and government employees took the day off in observance of President's Day, executives from the nation's two satellite radio providers were busy putting the final touches on an announcement that sent the satellite business world into orbit. Yesterday, officials from XM and Sirius said they had reached an agreement to merge the two companies to create one satellite radio superpower.
> 
> Worth an estimated $13 billion, XM and Sirius inked a tax-free, all-stock merger where XM shareholders will receive a fixed exchange ratio of 4.6 shares of Sirius for each share of XM owned. Of the newly combined company, XM and Sirius shareholders will each own about 50 percent, the companies said.
> 
> Current Sirius CEO Mel Karmazin is slated to become the new company's CEO, and Gary Parsons, current XM chair, will become Chairman of the new company. According to the companies, current XM CEO Hugh Panero will "continue in his current role until the anticipated close of the merger."
> 
> It's a given that the new company will offer its combined 14 million subscribers more programming options than ever before - what's not a given is the deal receiving regulatory approval from the powers that be. In a move industry observers see as early catering to the FCC, part of the merger deal includes the option for subscribers to pick their channels via a la carte.
> 
> Another point of contention is the recently introduced Local Emergency Radio Service Preservation Act of 2007 which looks to give the FCC a mandate to rule on whether satellite radio can offer local services. XM and Sirius made a point of saying the merger will enable the new company to improve on such services like local real-time traffic and weather.
> 
> Critics of a possible merger have pointed out that a combined XM/Sirius satellite radio company will leave the market with only one provider and consumers will ultimately be at the monopoly's mercy. But the companies said the combo will only enhance a listeners programming lineup, improve technological advancements and distribution and will better position the company to "compete for consumers' attention and entertainment dollars." The company is hoping free OTA radio, iPods and mobile streaming, HD and internet radio and next-generation wireless technologies will all be defined collectively as the competitive marketplace in the eyes of the FCC.


www.SkyReport.com - usedwith permission


----------



## bigpro

HDMe said:


> I wonder about folks who have one or the other in their cars.. as I understood it, I didn't think the antennas were the same so I wonder which antenna configuration the merged company will use? Could be a lot of unhappy car owners who have an antenna that no longer works.
> 
> Unless they choose to simulcast both ways... which would sort of defeat the purpose of a merger.


I've interchanged the antennas with no problems whatsoever. My wife a roady, then switched to the Sirius One. Just unplugged the roady, plugged in the one, didn't change a single cable.
I also use the roady's home antenna for the One in the house.


----------



## Richard King

Nick said:


> *"...part of the deal includes an option for subscribers to pick their channels a la carte"*
> 
> Today's SkyReport:
> 
> www.SkyReport.com - usedwith permission


Which means higer costs for all.


----------



## Richard King

I wonder what happens with "lifetime" subs.


----------



## Mrpalmer420

If OnA go then i go as do alot of the XM subs. I refuse to pay for Howie radio. I alos hope that ELo stays the director of programming. this is the first person i ever heard speak that actually gets the listener. it would be a shame to see him go.


----------



## keith_benedict

The FCC already has a provision in place specifically barring both satellite radio licenses from being owned by the same company. This is a non-starter.

But let me say that I'd love to swap my Directv XM stations for the Sirius stations.


----------



## Mrpalmer420

The FCC also stated taht there may be a way to work around this clause. If they were not thinking about allowing it why would they even state that the clause coulded be worked around or removed


----------



## gb33

As a Sirius subscriber for almost 4 years, THIS SUCKS. I am seriously bummed. i just see nothing but rate hikes and "packages" in the future. If this becomes the case it's bye bye sat radio. Having XM on DTV I can honestly say they have NOTHING that I prefer over Sirius as far as music. Even their Kids channel and Christmas music was VERY subpar.


----------



## djlong

Maybe the comissioners are looking for free junkets to "discuss" how one could get the rules changed.


----------



## machavez00

Mrpalmer420 said:


> If O&A go then i go as do alot of the XM subs. I refuse to pay for Howie radio. I also hope that ELo stays the director of programming. this is the first person i ever heard speak that actually gets the listener. it would be a shame to see him go.


I didn't get XM for O&A as they were a premiuum channel when I bought my truck. I did start listening went it became part of the regular lineup. I would hate to see them go. If O&A are canned it would be to make Hoo Hoo happy. Beside as far as I know there is not an extra fee for the Howard channels. They would have to arrange it so their shows aren't on at the same time. Then throw Ron and Fez into the mix. The easy scenario is O&A, Ron and Fez are are cut loose.

XM faq http://www.xmradio.com/merger/index.xmc


----------



## La Push Commercial Codman

What it means is you may receive on Sirius or xm radio units, both xm and sirius either on a xm radio or sirius radio. XM MUSIC IS DOING A EXCELLANT job for music and Sirius is doing a excellant job in provided talkshows, news, traffic, weather and sports. My xm radio would pick up the Sirius satellite's running a figure 8, and it own xm satellites. My Sirius radio would pick up the the xm satellites xm 3 and xm 4, and it would pick up the Sirius satellites running figure 8.

Personelly, there will have to be a swap out of xm and Sirius radios, maybe. It all depends. Satellite radio operates up in 2200 MHZ OR GHZ? Maybe, it should not be to hard.. The ones in trouble were hard to say. National Association of Broadcaster complicate things with satellite radio pressure, and these C.E.O.'S were nervious..

When, I contacted xm, they knew about the merger, but they said, for some time, they will holding off on the answer. The first thing must past thru, the FCC chairmen Kevin Martin and his FCC board approval or not for merger. 

The other thing was the contracts for professional sports. They will end up negiotating news contracts on sports programing and news talk programs.. Modifying the programs... :sure:


----------



## paulman182

I have read that the data streams are encoded differently and, unless the two separate systems are continued, customers of one company or the other will definitely be swapping out receivers. Sirius is supposedly a form of MPEG2 and XM, MPEG4.


----------



## Mrpalmer420

I hope that since they are forcing this upon us then they are will to replace all units that we have purchased. I just bought a roady for my wife and would hate to have to replace it this soon(yes i know it is late 2007 /early 2008)


----------



## aloishus27

I doubt this merger will go through, even if Sirius sent me a press release via e-mail.

I love my S50 and would hate to replace it. If these two companies merge they had better come out with an S50esque product if they end up using XMs birds.

just my .02


----------



## tomertl

February 19, 2007

To: SIRIUS Subscribers 

Today is a very exciting day for SIRIUS customers. As you may have 
heard, SIRIUS Satellite Radio and XM Satellite Radio are merging to form 
the nation's premier audio entertainment provider. 

This combination of our two offerings will benefit you - our loyal 
listeners. As a single company, we'll provide superior programming to you 
every day with the best of both SIRIUS and XM. Currently, XM and 
SIRIUS broadcast a wide range of commercial-free music channels, exclusive 
sports coverage, news, talk, and entertainment programming. Howard 
Stern. Oprah and Friends. The NFL. MLB. NBA. ESPN. CNBC. Fox News. 
Additionally, the combined company will be able to improve existing 
services such as real-time traffic information and rear-seat video as well 
as introduce new ones. 

After shareholder and regulatory approvals, we anticipate that the 
combination will be finalized by the end of 2007. Until then, both 
companies will continue to operate independently. We will continue to provide 
you with the uninterrupted service - as well as the outstanding 
customer support - that you have come to expect and enjoy from SIRIUS. We do 
not anticipate any changes in your service during the merger process, 
however, please call our customer care team on 1- 888-539-7474 should you 
have any questions.

We look forward to the many benefits this combination will offer and 
continuing to make your listening experience an enjoyable one - offering 
more of the Very Best Radio on Radio. 

Stay tuned,

Mel Karmazin, CEO


----------



## La Push Commercial Codman

Gosh, xm may work with Sirius satellite birds, but not Sirius satellite radio not working. a couple Hundred bucks down the toilet.. Sirius said once merge happen, my lifetime service is over, with others. Is that correct. Does anybody know?


----------



## Nick

Today's SkyReport


> Once dust from the initial bomb of Sirius and XM's merger announcement settled, observers, analysts, and consumer groups all took turns interpreting just what a combined satellite radio superpower would mean for the market and country. But as the shockwaves were being felt, executives involved with putting the deal together reached out to their subscribers in an effort to explain just what was going on.
> 
> In a letter to Sirius customers, CEO Mel Karmazin described an exciting move that will provide superior programming, improved services like real-time traffic and the expedited development of rear-seat video. The executive said the combination of Sirius and its rival XM would be finalized by the end of the year "after shareholder and regulatory approval."
> 
> But the merger is far from a done deal, and one man - namely Federal Communications Commission Chair Kevin Martin - was quick to point out that the companies have a long way to go before the U.S. sees a unified satellite radio provider. Said Martin , "The hurdle here, however, would be high as the commission originally prohibited one company from holding the only two satellite radio licenses."
> 
> Echoing Martin's sentiments was Wedbush Morgan's William Kidd who said regulatory approval is the obvious challenge with a likelihood less than 50 percent. The analyst also said even if the deal is allowed, "it could take three to five years for many of the revenue synergies to be realized."
> 
> Still, others don't believe regulatory approval will be as difficult as most envision.
> 
> Oppenheimer's Thomas Eagan said its likely federal regulars will approve the merger because the audio industry - unlike video - has changed so dramatically since the two licenses were granted years ago. The analyst said the introduction and success of MP3 players - especially Apple's iPod - and the coming impact of internet and HD radio have all contributed to a market that would embrace the combined competitive power of a unified satellite radio provider.
> 
> Eagan also pointed out that changing the FCC license restriction to enable one company to hold both DARS licenses does not require congressional approval - a restriction that was part of the original license grant.


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## NFLnut

bigpro said:


> I've interchanged the antennas with no problems whatsoever. My wife a roady, then switched to the Sirius One. Just unplugged the roady, plugged in the one, didn't change a single cable.
> I also use the roady's home antenna for the One in the house.


I have used XM antennas for my Sirius receiver several times when the store didn't have Sirius' in stock. They work fine, albeit signal strength is a little lower.


----------



## Richard King

I suspect that the two services will remain as is for quite some time so that all radios would not have to be replaced. Eventually a new radio that can do both will be released (probably right after all approvals are met). People who buy the new radio will be able to pick from either service or both services (at an additional fee). Those with the old radios will remain with what they purchased until it comes time to replace their "old" radios.


----------



## machavez00

Richard King said:


> I suspect that the two services will remain as is for quite some time so that all radios would not have to be replaced. Eventually a new radio that can do both will be released (probably right after all approvals are met). People who buy the new radio will be able to pick from either service or both services (at an additional fee). Those with the old radios will remain with what they purchased until it comes time to replace their "old" radios.


What about those of us who OEM radios in our vehicles? GM for XM and DC for Sirius. There are a lot of cars and trucks out there. How do I replace the radio in my truck?


----------



## jrb531

Once upon a time their were three outlets for Pay TV:

1. Cable
2. Direct TV
3. Dish Network

Now using "logic" it was determined that the costs for beaming Pay TV to 1 person or 1 zillion people would be near the same (aside from the equipment) so a merger was proposed (Well Dish buying Direct TV) which would lower costs "dramatically" and thus keep Cable honest and costs from going out of control.

Enter the FCC (in Cables back pocket) who rejected the merger because they felt that farmers (or anyone else without a local Cable company) would not have choice and somehow Dish would jack up prices for those in the boonies over those in the cities. (How they said this with a straight face is beyond me)

R-E-J-E-C-T-E-D-!

Enter today in the Pay Radio:

We have only two outlets for pay radio (three if you count some of the pay internet channels) and we have free radio.

1. Sirius
2. XM

Can anyone tell me how this is any different? In fact if the merger is allowed you could argue that there would be ZERO competition.

Yes it makes sense but so did the Pay TV merger.

If this passes the FCC we will then know for sure that the FCC was paid off and represents not the public but whoever waves the most $$$ in the way of donations to certain powerfull people.

$$$ talks... bull---- walks 

-JB


----------



## anex80

HDMe said:


> I wonder about folks who have one or the other in their cars.. as I understood it, I didn't think the antennas were the same so I wonder which antenna configuration the merged company will use? Could be a lot of unhappy car owners who have an antenna that no longer works.
> 
> Unless they choose to simulcast both ways... which would sort of defeat the purpose of a merger.


Actually the antenna's are interchangeable and will work with equipment from either company.


----------



## Richard King

There was a CNBC survey on the merger and 73% responded that the merger will go through. Of course this was very unscientific. The professional arbitrage guys are betting that it won't (currently).


----------



## James Long

There is a possibility ...
Which side of "one in a million" that possibility is is a good question!


----------



## oldave

jrb531 said:


> If this passes the FCC we will then know for sure that the FCC was paid off and represents not the public but whoever waves the most $$$ in the way of donations to certain powerfull people.


I didn't realize that was ever in doubt...

NAB is solidly against this, so I would predict it's doomed from the start.


----------



## Nick

*"When it comes to the regulatory process, the voice
of the consumer will be among the last to be heard"*



> SkyFILES: A (Terrible) Merger for the Ages
> by Michael Hopkins
> 
> It's trouble with a capital T.
> 
> The proposal to merge the nation's two satellite radio platforms - XM and Sirius - is bad news for consumers. Those who already have the services, or could get them sometime in the future, will be the losers if the companies combine operations.
> 
> Previous consolidations in the competitive audio world show a bleak picture of what awaits if there's just one satellite radio giant. Look at what happened with Clear Channel at the beginning of the millennium.
> 
> The AM/FM juggernaut dominated the traditional airwaves, and still has a lot of market prowess today. The company took its huge selection of stations, imposed on them a cookie-cutter format that made each station sound the same, and dumped so many minutes of advertising on its radio properties that listeners were wondering if they were tuning into an hour-long audio infomercial.
> 
> Consumers back then were looking for an alternative, and the choice came from two competing satellite radio platforms. Could a bigger DARS player become another Clear Channel? Maybe and maybe not. But some wonder if a bigger company has consumer choice and program diversity at the top of its to-do list.
> 
> A bigger satellite radio company would not have an incentive to improve its programming lineup, much less offer a diverse selection of content. A single platform will eliminate duplicative channels, and niche selections of music would be lost in any move to consolidate the platforms.
> 
> Take a look at the companies' 80s channels. One is programmed much differently than the other, with XM going deeper into the decade's music selections while Sirius' 80s channel is focused on bigger hits from those years. Even with their differentiated sounds, would a bigger, single company keep both channels? Probably not, which means a more narrow selection of music from that time period or for any other music genre.
> 
> When it comes to the regulatory process, the voice of the consumer will be among the last to be heard by decision makers. Listeners won't figure prominently into the final decision.
> 
> And that could be the biggest reason to fight the proposed merger.


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## jrb531

oldave said:


> I didn't realize that was ever in doubt...
> 
> NAB is solidly against this, so I would predict it's doomed from the start.


I will be interested in seeing how the dismiss this.

It was total silly back a few years ago when the FCC read off thier cable cue card printed and distributed by the cable industry that a merger between the dish companies would result in no competition for the farmers and the possibility that Dish would somehow charge farmers more than those in the cities.

-JB


----------



## moooog

jrb531 said:


> I will be interested in seeing how the dismiss this.
> 
> It was total silly back a few years ago when the FCC read off thier cable cue card printed and distributed by the cable industry that a merger between the dish companies would result in no competition for the farmers and the possibility that Dish would somehow charge farmers more than those in the cities.
> 
> -JB


Well, I'm a farmer (rancher), and most of us have been willing to pay giant premiums through the years to get any type of programming - there were a good number of C-Band dishes around here starting around the late 70's, and having those set up cost a great deal more than folks in town were paying for cable. It's a silly disingenuous argument, but even if I was unfairly charged another 5 bucks a month - I'd be thrilled to get all satellite radio sports programming under 1 roof, that would be more important to me than my satellite civil rights. Besides - my children would not starve if I decided to forgo satellite tv or radio, it's not like the electric company having a monopoly - there are tons of entertainment options out there and tons of options even if half of these entertainment companies merged. Why not give these companies a chance to see if they perform fairly - if not, THEN go after them with anti-trust legislation. The original laws were put in place to stop unfair practices that were going on, now it's like they assume guilt before it happens.


----------



## machavez00

Will current XM subscribers need to buy new radios?
No.

XM faq http://www.xmradio.com/merger/index.xmc

Do I have to buy a new radio?

No, there is no need to buy a new radio. You will continue to enjoy all SIRIUS programming on your current radio. Plus in the future you will be able to receive enhanced programming.

http://www.sirius.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=Sirius/Page&c=FlexContent&cid=1172002269210


----------



## Nick

*NAB: a combined entity "could not be
relied upon to comply with FCC rules"*

From SkyReport:


> It's a given broadcasters will fight the proposed merger between satellite radio rivals Sirius and XM. And while the deal is only a week old, it appears the broadcast industry's main lobby inside the Beltway is already formulating plans to battle the companies' combination.
> 
> Documents obtained by SkyREPORT reveal some of the points the National Association of Broadcasters may use in its effort to oppose the satellite radio merger on Capitol Hill and at the Federal Communications Commission. The memos, which appear to be written for NAB President David Rehr by the Washington, D.C. law firm of Wilkinson Barker Knauer, describe what FCC-related concerns could surface during the regulatory process tied to the $13 billion DARS transaction.
> 
> One of NAB's concerns is the creation of a satellite radio monopoly. "The combined entity would be the only company in the United States with the ability to provide a nationwide, multi-channel mobile audio programming service," said the association in a document described as bullet points on the pending merger.
> 
> "Such a combination would be contrary to an explicit FCC prohibition and decades of commission policy regarding competition. Such a government-created media monopoly would be unique in the history of the commission."
> 
> The NAB documents also suggest a combined XM/Sirius entity "could not be relied on to comply with FCC rules or conditions."
> 
> And the association resurrected its concerns about satellite radio equipment that interferes with broadcast radio stations. "Listeners to religious and other non-commercial radio stations may not only receive interference, but may receive 'signal bleed' that results in their unintentionally hearing on their car broadcast radios," the NAB said in its points.
> 
> XM and Sirius need FCC and Justice Department approval for their deal. On Wednesday, a hearing on the deal and the state of digital audio is set to take place before the House Judiciary Committee's Antitrust Task Force.


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## machavez00

The NAB's goals is for both companys to go under. They have fought both since they went live. I woud not be suprised if the NAB was behind the RIAA suit. The NAB fought XM when they wanted to broadcast local news and weather.


----------



## djlong

One of their complaints is that a combined company "could not be relied on to comply with FCC rules or conditions"???

Umm... PAYOLA? Does THAT ring a bell for the NAB? The *NAB* can't be relied on to comply with rules either!


----------



## Mrpalmer420

djlong said:


> One of their complaints is that a combined company "could not be relied on to comply with FCC rules or conditions"???


I Thought Part of the greatness that is satelite is the fact that they do not have to comply with FCC censorship


----------



## innersanctum

waynenm said:


> I also hope the FCC says "no". There is no benefit to no competition.


There is competition though. They are competing with HD Radio and traditional terrestrial radio and iPods and other audio technology. Terrestrial radio doesn't have to compete with anything so why is satellite radio held to a higher standard?


----------



## innersanctum

pinkertonfloyd said:


> I doubt the price will stay the same, Mel has been pushing to raise Sirius to $15/mo for some time. Mel is formully from Viacom, loves the Media industry bonehead... which is why he caved into the record companies over recording off-air on Sirius (XM was taking it to court)... the record companies are his buddies and pals...


Mel did an interview with Howard Stern yesterday and made two points from the interview. 1. There would be no price increase if there merger occurred. 2. With the merger, it is more likely there would be a decrease in the subscription prices due to the company having 15 million subscribers (if it happened today) instead of 6.7 and 8 million (Sirius and XM respectfully).


----------



## innersanctum

oldave said:


> I didn't realize that was ever in doubt...
> 
> *NAB is solidly against this*, so I would predict it's doomed from the start.


No kidding, they are against it because the NAB doesn't have Satellite Radio companies represented. They used to but when they realized they were competing against satellite radio, they removed them from their group. The NAB is a bunch of terrestrial radio cronies.


----------



## Nick

*Coming up with a new name is the latest obstacle in proposed Sat Radio Merger*

From SkyReport:


> While the nation's two satellite radio companies try to pull off their recently-announced merger, problems at the Federal Communications Commission may be just the beginning for the deal. As Sirius and XM leaders tell their subs that a joint company will lead to greater programming flexibility and variety, marketing specialists are warning of an impending obstacle that many have yet to address: branding.
> 
> Landor Associates' chief strategy officer Russ Meyer said the two DARS companies are looking at a branding problem that ultimately could do irreparable damage to the business if it is not managed correctly. According to the exec, the irony lies in the fact that both have fought so hard to differentiate their brands for years - and now a combined brand may do more harm than good.
> 
> Meyer said with XM hitting the market first it has assumed the role of leadership brand with Sirius having to build itself as more of an upstart challenger. He said the roles of each company exist in opposition that seems to defy any serious re-branding effort. Case in point: If Sirius' image of the underdog is seen as disingenuous once combined with the industry leader, the merger risks creating something that's diminishing for both.
> 
> The alternative, Meyer said, isn't that much better. With one brand absorbing the other entirely, the industry is left with two broadcasters offering different content and trying to become one entity (i.e. XM and Oprah vs. Sirius and Stern). "You've got the brands not aligning," the exec said, "and beneath that, you've got the content not aligning either."


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## djlong

iPods cannot be considered competition. CDs and cassettes were around back when SatRad's licenses were first conceived. If a Walkman or Discman wasn't competition back then, an iPod isn't competition now.

They're going to have to do better than that. HD radio is the same as terrestrial radio (commercials included). The internet isn't in cars (at least it shouldn't be) and although SOMEday WiMax might actually work, it isn't now and you can't say "let us merge because of something that MIGHT happen".


----------



## NFLnut

Nick said:


> *Coming up with a new name is the latest obstacle in proposed Sat Radio Merger*
> 
> From SkyReport:www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


People will forget about the separate branding once (IF) the merger takes place. It is totally irrelevant.


----------



## innersanctum

djlong said:


> iPods cannot be considered competition. CDs and cassettes were around back when SatRad's licenses were first conceived. If a Walkman or Discman wasn't competition back then, an iPod isn't competition now.
> 
> They're going to have to do better than that. HD radio is the same as terrestrial radio (commercials included). The internet isn't in cars (at least it shouldn't be) and although SOMEday WiMax might actually work, it isn't now and you can't say "let us merge because of something that MIGHT happen".


Audio Entertainment is the competition. CD's are still around but I challenge you to find the latest cassette tape in a store today. I can take my iPod and hook it up to an FM transmitter and it can be played in my car. I can take my Satellite Radio out of the car dock and connect it to my home dock and listen to the radio in the house. I can even take my satellite radio and walk down the street and listen to it.

A lot of things weren't around when SatRad licenses were first conceived but technology, as I am sure you are aware, changes everyday. We are living a lot differently than we were when SatRad licenses were issued. This is the problem that Terrestrial radio has had. Instead of developing new technology to meet consumer needs, they rested on their laurels and are now facing much better competition from satellite radio.

Satellite Radio is more than just music coming from outerspace. The technology allows you to record your favorite songs for playback later. It allows you to rewind or pause a show while it's playing so you don't miss something you otherwise would have missed. Satellite Radio is where my future listening will be. I don't even listen to terrestrial radio any longer. I don't need an iPod because I can record my favorite songs on my radio. If I am in a place where I can't get a signal but can get WiFi, my radio will connect to that I and I can listen to that.


----------



## pinkertonfloyd

innersanctum said:


> Mel did an interview with Howard Stern yesterday and made two points from the interview. 1. There would be no price increase if there merger occurred. 2. With the merger, it is more likely there would be a decrease in the subscription prices due to the company having 15 million subscribers (if it happened today) instead of 6.7 and 8 million (Sirius and XM respectfully).


Mel lower prices? there's been rumors for months, even from pro-sirius guys that Sirius was planing on increasing to $14.95 or $15.95/mo. given Mel K's record... I wouldn't hold him to it.


----------



## pinkertonfloyd

djlong said:


> iPods cannot be considered competition. CDs and cassettes were around back when SatRad's licenses were first conceived. If a Walkman or Discman wasn't competition back then, an iPod isn't competition now.
> 
> They're going to have to do better than that. HD radio is the same as terrestrial radio (commercials included). The internet isn't in cars (at least it shouldn't be) and although SOMEday WiMax might actually work, it isn't now and you can't say "let us merge because of something that MIGHT happen".


Uh... show me a Cassette Desk that holds 20,000 songs... that's the point, they weren't truely competition as CD/Cassettes offered 80 mins (at best) of music. The Ipod is a whole different animal... yes, they play music, but a TON more.


----------



## Nick

NFLnut said:


> People will forget about the separate branding once (IF) the merger takes place. It is totally irrelevant.


Not exactly. Companies wouldn't spend inordinate amounts of time & money
choosing just the right name and persona for a new product/service launch if
branding were irrelevant. For example, the product name "Head On" would 
probably not have been a good choice for an auto insurance company. 

On the other hand, Sirius seems to have done fairly well despite being hung
with a stupid monicker.


----------



## Nick

From SkyReport:


> Lawmakers got their first look at the pending merger between Sirius and XM Wednesday, with the House Judiciary Committee's Antitrust Task Force scrutinizing the $13 billion deal.
> 
> Sirius CEO Mel Karmazin defended the proposed transaction, saying the deal shouldn't be judged so early in the process. He said the merger is not anti-competitive and is in the consumers' best interest.
> 
> Karmazin also said a merged company promises to offer more choice to consumers, and that "no radio will be obsolete" when the companies combine operations. That would allow customers of both services to get the same content once the companies merged operations.
> 
> The Sirius exec told the House panel that a combined satellite radio entity would not raise prices, and he even committed to lowering prices in the future through a la carte and tiered programming options. "Raising our price to compete with free radio is absurd," Karmazin said.
> 
> Others at the hearing, however, criticized the pending deal.
> 
> David Rehr, president of the National Association of Broadcasters, said the satellite radio companies want to become "a government-sanctioned monopoly (and) the power to set subscription rates without constraint from a competing service." The NAB head added,"They want the power to eliminate the need to compete with one another to acquire programming and talent. They want the power to demand exclusive deals and the ability to cross-subsidize to unfairly compete against local broadcasters.
> 
> "And the fact is, this monopoly would reduce innovation for services and equipment for consumers since there will be no competition in their defined market," Rehr said.
> 
> Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers questioned whether a combined satellite radio company would leave "customers high and dry and with complications" if they couldn't get compatible reception equipment.


www.SkyReport.com - use with permission


----------



## djlong

Actually, back in the 90s I could get 10 hours or so on a CD - there *were* MP3 CD players out there (I had a couple of them).

The point is, if "Audio Entertainment" is the market, it was the market back then, not just now. That part hasn't changed, although some technology has gotten markedly better. "Audio Entertainment" back then had choices and lots of them but the FCC decided the market was "radio" - and delivering a signal to a receiver.

An iPod is just a "better mousetrap" of a Walkman. A *much* better one, I grant you (I bought my first iPod a few weeks ago, first Apple-branded ANYthing I've ever bought).

I think some have hit the nail on the head that the merger's timing is more due to the fear that the White House will change parties in the '08 election and make it even more difficult to get through (it was made more difficult when the GOP lost the Legislative branch).


----------



## djlong

When I read this: The NAB head added,"They want the power to eliminate the need to compete with one another to acquire programming and talent. They want the power to demand exclusive deals and the ability to cross-subsidize to unfairly compete against local broadcasters.

...my first thought is "isn't that what the NAB is trying to do with all the consolidation?"


----------



## Nick

From SkyReport:


> If the country's two satellite radio companies are able to convince federal regulators to allow their proposed merger, the newly combined supergroup would capture about 3.5 percent of all radio listening ears. That's according to a study slated for release next week that represents the first time the satellite radio audience has been quantified compared to the total radio audience.
> 
> According to an analysis of Arbitron fall 2006 survey data, about 5.6 percent of all respondents said they listened to satellite radio. The highest audience share of listening garnered by a single channel was .2 percent and the average satellite channel had a .009 listening share, the study said.
> 
> What is being seen as good news for terrestrial broadcasters is that satellite radio listeners tend to be heavy consumers of all things radio. The study said DARS enthusiasts spend more time with terrestrial radio than they do with satellite radio and internet radio. Compared to the 19 hours an average radio consumer listens to terrestrial radio each week, satellite radio fans spend a significant amount of more at 33 hours per week.
> 
> According to Arbitron, the fall 200 study was the first in which the company asked respondents to indicate their listening habits to satellite and internet radio in addition to terrestrial FM and AM services. Although the firm is tracking satellite and internet radio, Arbitron has yet to decide when it will report regular local market reports.


www.SkyReport.com - use with permission


----------



## jrb531

innersanctum said:


> There is competition though. They are competing with HD Radio and traditional terrestrial radio and iPods and other audio technology. Terrestrial radio doesn't have to compete with anything so why is satellite radio held to a higher standard?


And the Dish-DTV merger would have competed with Cable, Internet TV, yadda yadda yadda but the bought and paid for FCC said that this was not enough.

If they allow this while they rejected the Pay TV merger which had more competition then they will have some "serious" explaining to do.

-JB


----------



## jrb531

pinkertonfloyd said:


> Uh... show me a Cassette Desk that holds 20,000 songs... that's the point, they weren't truely competition as CD/Cassettes offered 80 mins (at best) of music. The Ipod is a whole different animal... yes, they play music, but a TON more.


So Dish and DTV can now merge because Ipods can hold videos?

So Dish and DTV can now merge because we can rent or buy DVD's?

This is utterly silly!

Pay TV and Pay Radio are not the same as storage media be it cassette, DVD, CD, 8-track or flash or hard drive storage. These are nothing but storage media to play back pre-recorded media.

Pay-TV and Pay Radio are means to transmite information live and while they "can" stream pre-recorded media they often are live and 2-way if you consider using the phone or internet for the backstream.

So saying Pay-TV/Radio's competition are pre-recorded media is just silly IMHO.

-JB


----------



## Nick

> So Dish and DTV can now merge because Ipods can hold videos?
> 
> So Dish and DTV can now merge because we can rent or buy DVD's?


Just to clarify...

DTV = Digital TV
D* = DirecTV


----------



## machavez00

There is also the push for the revival of the "Fairness Doctrine". Many right of center talkers have stated they would go to satellite if the "Fairness Doctrine " was revived. With satellite radio out of the way there will be one less refuge for talk show hosts. We will then be "left" with Airhead America stations. The Left wants their monopoly on media sources back.


----------



## Nick

*"Since neither (XM or Sirius) has yet to turn a profit...I wonder if both will survive
without a merger. If one of them shuts down, we're still left with only one, and all
the "monopoly" arguments go out the window."*



> SkyReport: Letters to the Editor
> 
> *Impose Compatibility, Diversity for Successful Merger*
> 
> SkyREPORT: You raised some interesting points in your SkyFILES article about opposing the DARS merger. As a multi-year subscriber to Sirius, having gotten fed up with incessant commercials as you mentioned, I have an interest in seeing commercial-free DARS succeed and grow. Since neither of the two companies has yet to turn a profit, many people choosing to go the MP3 route and with the broadcasters' onslaught with HD radio, I wonder if both will survive without a merger. If one of them shuts down, we're still left with only one, and all the "monopoly" arguments go out the window if no one else with deep pockets picks up the other license.
> 
> In my opinion, HD radio is a scam (at least in the Oregon market where there are lots of hills and valleys). There is a dearth of original programming worth listening to on the HD2 channels to justify a multi-hundred dollar investment in a HD receiver. Yet there are always the naive consumers who are going to believe the incessant ads for HD radio and buy one. Those consumers might have been happier spending those same dollars for a satellite radio, but many have to decide between one or the other and the "free" (i.e. no subscription) teaser for HD radio suckers them in.
> 
> So, maybe the best way the FCC can deal with this, if they and the DOJ are at all inclined to approve it, would be to place conditions on the approval about maintaining compatibility with an installed base of customer equipment and maintaining a certain programming diversity. I seriously doubt that we'd see much rise in subscription prices, given the terrestial compeition they face. - _Dave Gaffney_
> 
> *Terrible Column, Not Merger*
> 
> SkyREPORT: This article is written as if consumers today have only two choices for listening to music -- Sirius and XM. If that were true, a merger of the two companies would produce exactly the results you predict.
> 
> But you're so far off base here that you clearly can't see the truth.
> 
> Fortunately, I do see clearly, so I'll explain it to you.
> 
> Consumers today choose from among an unprecedented variety of music distribution methods, including: traditional AM/FM, traditional CD sales, DAB, HD radio, cellphone radio services such as MSpot, internet streaming methods such as IP multicast, podcasts, and music download services such as iTunes.
> 
> And I'm sure I'm overlooking some. Sirius and XM do not merely compete against each other. They compete against ALL of these methods. Indeed, they are at a disadvantage because their technology is inherently incapable of functioning adequately in certain listening environments.
> 
> In the opinion of the directors of these two companies, they cannot afford to compete with each other in this narrow niche. They are the experts here; their opinions are more valuable than yours (or mine).
> 
> You, in your ignorance, presume to contradict them? Please. - _Peter Glaskowsky_
> 
> *Merger Could Help, Not Hurt Consumer*
> 
> SkyREPORT -- I think Michael Hopkins is short sighted in his assessment of the proposed merger of XM and Sirius. He views the probable outcome to be detrimental to the consumer yet ignores the possibility of significant gains for the consumer in terms of program content and technical performance.
> 
> XM and Sirius have dramatically different orbital architectures, geo-synchronous vs. high elliptical. A merger of these architectures could provide the listener with much improved link reliability. Likewise, a joining of the unique programming carried by the two companies could provide a rich mix exceding what either company carries today.
> 
> I believe that Mr. Hopkins fear of a "least common denominator" outcome of the merger is overly pessimistic and speculative. - _Jon Bryson, Space system consultant_
> 
> *DARS Must Compete for Listeners*
> 
> SkyREPORT: Whenever a media merger becomes a possibility I tend to grow tired of hearing about people saying things like "it's bad for consumers because the new conglomerate won't have a reason to provide their service at a reasonable price." The new company would have a great reason... to keep subscribers, period.
> 
> DARS services are not as American as apple pie like pay-TV is, or even more so as the wired telco's are. A majority of the people in this country still seem to feel it's silly to pay for radio services. If the newly formed Sirius/XM entity doesn't keep rates near what they are at now, new subscribers will balk at their offerings and continue to listen to free over-the-air radio or their MP3 and CD players, and present subs would likely drop the burden of a high bill for a service they don't really 'need.' That, to me, is more than enough competition to keep them in check. They don't need to compete with someone else, they need to compete with consumers' pocket books. - _Derek Strelow, Long Beach, CA _


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## Nick

*There's a possibility regulators could take aim at programming, and given
broadcaster complaints about competing content from XM and Sirius, there
may be calls for a bigger satellite radio company to give up local traffic and
weather services.*



> SkyFILES: A (Terrible) Merger for the Ages, Part II
> by Michael Hopkins [email protected]
> 
> As the proposed merger of XM and Sirius continues to win supporters and attempts to deal with detractors (such as myself), the "what ifs" are beginning to surround the $13 billion deal.
> 
> The speculation includes conditions that may be placed on the transaction.
> 
> As I read through comments generated from my column last week (all of which are appreciated), and after taking a look at press reports and analyst notes on the deal, it appears regulatory conditions would have to be part of any final satellite radio merger. People are nuts to think no conditions would be placed on a combined DARS entity.
> 
> What could the conditions look like? There's a possibility regulators could take aim at programming. And given broadcaster complaints about competing content from XM and Sirius, there may be calls for a bigger satellite radio company to give up local traffic and weather services.
> 
> Some suggest the condition would never see the light of day, and the merging companies wouldn't agree to it in the first place. However, given broadcasters and their powerful lobby inside the Beltway and a few lawmakers who constantly complain about the localized offerings, the idea is bound to surface in any future discussions on the deal.
> 
> A content-specific condition that could win support is a requirement for more public interest programming from a merged satellite radio company. This could be a tough pill to swallow for a bigger DARS entity, especially after Sirius recently made the really bad decision to drop C-SPAN from its lineup. But it could put satellite radio on par with other multiplatform providers, such as satellite TV and its requirement to dedicate 7 percent of its channel space to public interest programming.
> 
> Could regulators take aim at satellite radio's back-seat video plans? This may be a stretch for a specific condition, but some argue that DARS licenses are for audio services only.
> 
> The problem with restricting programming is that satellite radio's competitors would be allowed to deliver their wide selection of services while a single DARS entity would be stuck with a narrowed selection of national channels. It would be unfair and may run foul of First Amendment protections.
> 
> Other conditions could address receiver compatibility, product availability at retail and subscription prices.
> 
> Of course, these are predictions coming out of left field. Nonetheless, it's going to be a bumpy road for the merger to receive regulatory approval, conditions or no conditions.


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## Geronimo

Nick said:


> Just to clarify...
> 
> DTV = Digital TV
> D* = DirecTV


Normally I would agree but DTV and DISH are the actual trading symbols of the companies and in threads on financial matters those symbols are often used.


----------



## Geronimo

anex80 said:


> Actually the antenna's are interchangeable and will work with equipment from either company.


Actually the antennas are somewhat different. may have gotten one to work with the other system but others have had difficulty.


----------



## Nick

Geronimo said:


> Normally I would agree but DTV and DISH are the actual trading symbols of the companies and in threads on financial matters those symbols are often used.


Chief, if this was a stock market forum, your comment might be useful, but it's not, and it's not.

What we're trying to do is help minimize confusion, especially among our newer users. As an
old timer to DBS dscussions, you should know that these abbreviations have been in generally
accepted use since way back in the DBSForum days.

DirecTV = D*
Echostar = E*


----------



## machavez00

Geronimo said:


> Actually the antennas are somewhat different. may have gotten one to work with the other system but others have had difficulty.


see post#59 of this thread


machavez00 said:


> Do I need to buy new equipment?


----------



## Nick

*Sirius & XM indicate that existing radios will work and rates will be honored*

SkyReport:


> Although far from a done deal, XM and Sirius are moving forward as if the highly publicized merger they recently announced was, in fact, done. In an attempt to satisfy growing concerns over whether the money consumers invested in electronic equipment for the service will still work once the two companies become one.
> 
> Last week, both companies addressed their subscribers hoping not only to please current subscribers, but also in order to convince those considering the service in the future that their money is well spent.
> 
> XM and its current CEO Gary Parsons issued something called "The Consumer Promise" saying "as long as you are an XM subscriber, your XM radio will continue to receive XM's programming. Following the merger, XM expects that the existing radios will be able to receive a mix of programming from both services."
> 
> Sirius basically told its subscribers the same thing through a guarantee that existing radios will not become obsolete if the merger is approved. The dog-star company's "Sirius Guarantee" recognized that "million of radios in the market... are built into the vehicles manufactured by its automakers" and that "customers who sign up now for Sirius will have their subscription rate honored by the merged company."
> 
> XM is also directing customers with further questions to visit a new portion of the company's website dedicated to consumer input and updates on XM's business throughout the merger process. For those interested, go to http://www.xmradio.com/promise.


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## DonCorleone

Nick said:


> *Sirius & XM indicate that existing radios will work and rates will be honored*


As a stockholder, I was thrilled to see that article last week. Hopefully that will re-boost the retail market.


----------



## machavez00

Mel also stated that lifetime subs will be honored. (ask in an earlier post)


----------



## NFLnut

Nick said:


> Not exactly. Companies wouldn't spend inordinate amounts of time & money
> choosing just the right name and persona for a new product/service launch if
> branding were irrelevant. For example, the product name "Head On" would
> probably not have been a good choice for an auto insurance company.
> 
> On the other hand, Sirius seems to have done fairly well despite being hung
> with a stupid monicker.


Once the merger takes place, *most* will quickly forget the marketing efforts of both companies since those efforts will have become irrelevant. Most people, and especially those who are or will be customers of the merged company, will focus one what the newly merged monstrosity has to offer. Only the few with an axe to grind will care about past marketing.


----------



## Nick

By your own choice of words ,you apparently have your _own_ axe to grind. :sure:


----------



## machavez00

This may be why RIAA and others want more money from XM/Sirius. They need it for payola to terrestrial broadcasters:Four Groups Settle Radio Payola Investigation http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6421668.html?title=Article&spacedesc=news


----------



## Nick

*...the automotive industry may be a surprising winner*

SkyReport:


> Merger Boosts Auto Adoption
> 
> The most recent news coming from the satellite radio merger battlefield is that both XM and Sirius have guaranteed that their subscribers' equipment will continue to work fine once the union is complete. Now new information suggests that not only are there clear synergies for the two companies to combine, but when it's all said and done, the automotive industry may be a surprising winner as well.
> 
> It's been widely reported that if the 50/50 merger goes through, existing shareholders in both XM and Sirius will receive an equal stake in the yet-to-be named combined company with some 14 million subscribers. (XiriuM is the best we've heard so far). And according to Strategy Analytics' report "XM Sirius Merger: Competition Mounts for HD Radio," U.S. car buyers listen to radio nearly 60 percent of their audio entertainment time and there are around 160 million consumer vehicles on the road.
> 
> "While satellite radio growth has been very strong and automotive consumers are brand aware, most are not subscribing. Often for fear of making the wrong satellite choice, it is too expensive or they are happy with their current FM radio," said Joanne Blight, SA's director of automotive practice. "With improved content choices, realigned advertising levels and targeted pricing, radio and digital audio in the car is a deep, rich opportunity stream."


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## Nick

*"Offers of conditions should be taken with a grain of salt...
the satellite radio industry has already proven it cannot
be trusted to live up to conditions imposed on it."*

SkyReport:


> Not only have industry observers and listeners alike come out in opposition to the idea of a satellite radio superpower - now consumer activist groups are getting on board to try and shoot the plan down. XM and Sirius aren't coming clean about their pricing plans, the groups claim, and American consumers - specifically sat radio subscribers - deserve some more answers.
> 
> According to testimony of Consumers Union, Consumer Federation of America and Free Press before the House Telecommunications Subcommittee hearing on the proposed merger, company officials are misleading consumers that subscription rates won't increase after the deal goes down. In fact, the groups say, by emphasizing a temporary moratorium on price increases for an old package of services, XM and Sirius are giving the impression that that is what consumers will pay for the new, combined offerings.
> 
> In addition to urging federal agencies to scrutinize the impact of the merger on prices and choices, the organizations called upon Congress other regulators to address the lack of competition, local content and diversity in ownership in the current radio marketplace.
> 
> "The XM-Sirius merger simply cannot be considered in a vacuum, independent of the deplorable state of competition in radio, the needs of listeners and communities for sources of diverse local news and information, and the significant barriers facing independent artists and commentators and would-be minority station owners," said Gene Kimmelman, VP of international and federal affairs at Consumers Union. "It is time to take advantage of digital technological breakthroughs and devise incentives to expand local and minority ownership opportunities in radio and other media and to hold the line against the greatest threat to a competitive and diverse media: mergers that concentrate ownership in too few hands."
> 
> Said Mark Cooper, director of research for the Consumer Federation of America, "Offers of conditions on the mergers should be taken with a grain of salt. The recent track record of conditions has been abysmal and the satellite radio industry has already proven that it cannot be trusted to live up to conditions imposed on it."
> 
> For a complete copy of the testimony, go to http:// www.hearusnow.org/.


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## Nick

SkyReport:


> It was round two for Congressional hearings eyeing the proposed merger between XM and Sirius. And just like last week's event before the House Judiciary Committee's Antitrust Task Force, mixed feelings about combining the nation's two satellite radio companies surfaced Wednesday before the House Telecommunications Subcommittee.
> 
> During his testimony, Sirius CEO Mel Karmazin reiterated past promises tied to the merger, including a pledge not to raise prices for service and providing subscribers equipment that connects to both satellite radio offerings.
> 
> Karmazin also stressed a combined satellite radio company would compete vigorously in the marketplace. "The fact is that we compete with local broadcasters. We compete with free radio," he said. "If we cannot accommodate customers who are paying $12.95 a month, we don't have a very good business model."
> 
> But the proposed merger could not escape its critics. Peter Smyth, president and CEO of radio station owner Greater Media, alleged that XM and Sirius have a track record of "misrepresenting their intentions, not following the rules that have been established, and failing to correct their past transgressions."
> 
> As part of his accusations, Smyth told the subcommittee that the satellite radio companies have operated terrestrial repeaters in violation of Federal Communications Commission rules. And he said satellite radio technology has "bleeding" problems in which content is leaked through to traditional AM/FM airwaves.
> 
> "If this government-sanctioned monopoly is approved, consumers will be the losers," Smyth said. "Subscription prices will rise, because there will be no competition to restrain monopoly rates. Jobs will be eliminated. Innovation will suffer. Neither listeners nor advertisers will benefit."
> 
> If that wasn't enough, Rep. Gene Green (D-Texas) criticized the satellite radio merger during the hearing. Green is known in satellite circles for sponsoring legislation that would require satellite radio companies to eliminate localized content and keep their services national in scope.
> 
> Reponses from other lawmakers on the XM/Sirius merger were mixed, with some opposing the deal and others supporting it.


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## Richard King

http://portfolios.abcnews.go.com/qu...ce=reuters&path=/Reuters/20070307/2214_79.xml
Sirius to charge less than $26/month post merger


> Sirius Satellite Radio Inc. <SIRI.O> on Wednesday tried to clear up confusion over the cost of its service after buying rival XM Satellite Radio Inc. <XMSR.O> by telling lawmakers that it would be less than $25.90, the price of two services combined. "If our merger is approved, we will offer consumers a much more attractive choice -- the best of each service on one radio at a price well below the cost of the two services today," Sirius Chief Executive Mel Karmazin told a House telecommunications subcommittee hearing....
> 
> When asked if the discount would be around $10 or $2, Karmazin said it "looks closer to 10 than to two."


More...


----------



## Mrpalmer420

If my rates go uip more then 2 dollars i wil;l drop in an instatnt. i refuse to pay for that a$$ Stern or that stupid deal that sirius made for him. For christ sake they are paying billions for a guy that refuses to work friday and now the subs will have to pay for it.


----------



## James Long

> Sirius Satellite Radio Inc. <SIRI.O> on Wednesday tried to clear up confusion over the cost of its service after buying rival XM Satellite Radio Inc. <XMSR.O> by telling lawmakers that it would be less than $25.90, the price of two services combined. "If our merger is approved, we will offer consumers a much more attractive choice -- the best of each service on one radio at a price well below the cost of the two services today," Sirius Chief Executive Mel Karmazin told a House telecommunications subcommittee hearing....
> 
> When asked if the discount would be around $10 or $2, Karmazin said it "looks closer to 10 than to two."


Oh joy! Prices are going up to at least $16-$24 per month and they make it sound like a discount?

I'm sure there are a few people who subscribe to both services today (some post here) but now they are talking about forcing people to buy it all (both services) and calling it a discount. Shesh, what a way to spin a story!


----------



## Nick

All this frettin' and fussin' about fallout from a merger that most likely won't even happen.
Is it because you people like to complain or is it that you just like to _'hear'_ yourself talk?


----------



## Mrpalmer420

hey Nick. As of right now it looks like the deal may go through. As a subscriber we have a right to comment on any news that come out. Hell even if i wasn't a sub i could comment on the news. Called freedom of speech buddy.


----------



## Geronimo

James Long said:


> Oh joy! Prices are going up to at least $16-$24 per month and they make it sound like a discount?
> 
> I'm sure there are a few people who subscribe to both services today (some post here) but now they are talking about forcing people to buy it all (both services) and calling it a discount. Shesh, what a way to spin a story!


How do you see an increase of $16 to $24 ?


----------



## Geronimo

Nick said:


> All this frettin' and fussin' about fallout from a merger that most likely won't even happen.
> Is it because you people like to complain or is it that you just like to _'hear'_ yourself talk?


Well that is sort of the risk you run when you start a topic----someone might actually comment on it.


----------



## James Long

Geronimo said:


> How do you see an increase of $16 to $24 ?


You have misread it --- "going up *to* at least $16-$24 per month" not "an increase *of* $16 to $24". 

The Math: In the text I quoted ...... _telling lawmakers that it would be less than $25.90, the price of two services combined_ ... _the discount would be around $10 or $2, Karmazin said it "looks closer to 10 than to two."_ ...​Mel Karmazin told congress that the price of the combined service would be $10 to $2 less than the current combined price of $25.90 ... the new price would be $15.90 to $23.90 ... prices going up *to* $16-$24.

A merger that raises prices. Who would have thunk it! :grin:


----------



## Geronimo

Sorry I apparently did misread it! My mistake.


----------



## Nick

Sounds like someone needs a hug...

SkyReport:


> NAB Weighs in on DARS Merger
> 
> One of the central themes satellite radio executives use to convince the regulatory world that a merger between Sirius and XM is a good thing rests on the notion that the companies not only compete with each other, but with the industry is up against terrestrial radio, internet radio and other digital music delivery systems alike. Some say the argument is valid, others - like the National Association on Broadcasters (NAB) - believe otherwise.
> 
> In a letter written to Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), NAB President and CEO David Rehr said XM and Sirius, in fact, do not compete with local broadcasters in the sense that it should determine whether the merger should be approved. Because the characteristics of satellite radio are unique, "XM and Sirius offer a pre-packaged bundle of national, mobile and digital radio channels," he said. "Local radio broadcasters do not offer a a large bundle of programming, nor can they cross-subsidize hundreds of niche programs to reach specific audiences."
> 
> So if the broadcasters don't compete with satellite radio, why is NAB opposed to the merger? Rehr said it's because both XM and Sirius do compete in the local markets of terrestrial broadcasters. "Simply put, every person who listens to satellite radio is one person not listening to a local radio station, which affects a station's ratings, and in turn, ad revenues," he said.
> 
> Rehr also said the competition between terrestrial and satellite radio is a one-way street: DARS providers impact the business of local broadcasters but radio stations are not players in the national market for mobile, bundled, digital satellite radio services.
> 
> How about the other products that compete with XM and Sirius? Nope. According to Rehr, no other product or service competes with XM and Sirius enough to impact the satellite radio market. iPods? "Only allow consumers to store and play music from their own collection." Internet radio and cell phones? "Do not offer comparable sound quality, and neither is convenient to access in cars." HD Radio? "Never be available nationwide."
> 
> Rehr said that a merger between Sirius and XM would not be good public policy and violate both the 1996 Telecommunications Act and anti-trust principles and "reward bad actors for poor decision-making." He said the satellite radio companies are not credible candidates for merger, not deserving of a government bail-out, and not trustworthy stewards of monopoly control over the market for national, mobile, digital radio service.


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## Nick

*the same executive who gave Howard Stern upwards of $550 million...
said the company would allow subs to exclude adult programming*

SkyReport:


> The Senate Judiciary Committee hearing this week about the proposed merger between Sirius and XM offered no real significant advances in the debate - nor did it give observers any indication how regulators will act when it comes time for the FCC to vote. But an interesting twist came from the latest round of hearings, mainly Sirius CEO Mel Karmazin saying the combined company would offer subscribers a lower-priced tier with fewer channels.
> 
> Committee members voiced their concern about the merger creating an unrivaled satellite radio monster, but others cautioned not to define the digital music distribution industry so narrowly. Utah Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch said if the deal was approved he doubted another satellite radio player would emerge but there are ample other services that would serve as competition for the infused company.
> 
> Spurred by comments from Rep. Sam Brownback (R- Kan.) about indecency and adult programming, Karmazin told the committee the combined company would offer subscribers a lower-tier package with fewer channels for under $10 per month. Coming from the same executive who gave Howard Stern upwards of $550 million, Karmazin also said the company would allow subs to exclude adult programming from their subscription packages.
> 
> Today the FCC is holding an open commission meeting where many industry analysts and investors hope to get a glimpse of how the agency will tackle the Sirius/XM merger.


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## Nick

*"...merger will create opportunity 
for widespread abuse of power"*

SkyReport:


> The National Association of Broadcasters took one more opportunity to voice its opposition to the proposed merger between Sirius and XM last week in comments sent to the Federal Communications Commission.
> 
> In a letter from the organization's president David Rehr, the NAB said if the merger is approved, the new company will control all of the spectrum allocated for satellite radio in the U.S., effectually barring any competitive entry in the foreseeable future. Rehr said , and consumers ultimately will be the ones to suffer.
> 
> The NAB believes competition between the two satellite radio companies has served consumers of the technology well with each company differentiating itself through programming and equipment. Rehr said despite what satellite radio executives are claiming to be merger-specific public interest benefits, all "alleged" benefits would be more likely to occur without the monopolistic merger.
> 
> For example, "both of the parties are free today to unbundle their channel offerings... (and) a smaller programming package for less than $12.95 per month is possible without a merger," Rehr said.
> 
> "The repackaging of channels from both services into one offering is an illusory consumer benefit because it will result in the elimination of existing channels or formats." In the long run, he said, reductions in overall program availability will decrease program diversity.
> 
> Another "hollow" promise Rehr said XM and Sirius are making is of reduced prices for less overall programming being a benefit for consumers. The NAB head said any price concessions offered after the merger will "clearly be temporary, unlike their monopoly power, which will lead to price increases in the future."
> 
> Satellite radio officials have said that changes in the digital audio distribution marketplace justify the reversal of the commission's rules governing competition in the sector - namely that two companies must hold separate licenses. But Rehr said this notion is false, citing the group's incorrect definition of the competitive marketplace in order to "obscure" the merger's monopoly in satellite radio. "It is simply wrong to equate internet radio, local AM/FM and HD radio, MP3 devices, and iPods with satellite radio," Rehr said. "No other audio service is an effective substitute for a national multichannel mobile audio programming service, (nor can they) be expected to restrain the monopolistic impulses of a united XM/Sirius."
> 
> Driving the NAB's stance home, Rehr reminded the FCC that it previously rejected a merger between DIRECTV and EchoStar's DISH Network years ago to avoid a monopolistic satellite TV service. The broadcasting group is urging the commission to "recognize the value of continued competition in satellite radio and the adverse consequences" of the potential merger.


 www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## Nick

*"...the proposed XM/Sirius merger raises serious antitrust concerns"*

SkyReport:


> Arguments on both sides of the XM/Sirius merger debate are making their way around regulators, analysts and industry press as a decision looms on the multiplatform horizon. Now, an independent study claims that if the deal goes through, the satellite radio industry will have a bonified monopoly on its hands potentially violating antitrust regulations.
> 
> According to the report sent to the Federal Communications Commission and the Department of Justice, satellite radio is a distinct product market and if the proposed merger between the industry's two major companies goes through, consumers would be at the mercy of a monopoly that likely violates antitrust laws. Conducted by Criterion Economics, the study claims to offer "concrete evidence and analysis to some of the most important questions that have plagued lawmakers since the merger was announced earlier this year."
> 
> For the study, Criterion's J. Gregory Sidak - former deputy general counsel for the FCC - was asked to determine whether subscription-based satellite radio services are a relevant product market for antitrust purposes, and to assess the unilateral pricing effects of the proposed deal. The study took into account competition from other audio products such as MP3 players and internet radio, and determined that satellite radio is a distinct product market for antitrust analysis. Even when the product market is expanded to include AM, FM and HD radio, the proposed XM/Sirius merger still raises serious antitrust concerns, the report said.
> 
> The Criterion study said the merger would be anti-competitive because it constitutes a monopoly under the most reasonable market definition and would increase seller concentration ratios to "unacceptably high" levels. The report also said the majority of efficiencies identified by the companies would not benefit consumers nor preserve consumer welfare.
> 
> The Criterion study was commissioned by the Consumer Coalition for Competition in Satellite Radio - a group claiming to be the only organization "dedicated to protecting the interests of satellite radio subscribers in the United States." Complete details of the report can be found at the group's website, http://www.c3sr.org.
> 
> In related news, the Alabama House of Representatives unanimously passed a joint resolution voicing opposition to the proposed merger of Sirius and XM. According to sources, the state hopes other state governments will introduce similar resolutions. The legislation will now go before the Alabama Senate.


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## Nick

*...(disclosure would not be) a good idea because "it
would detract from support from different groups."*

SkyReport:



> Last week, the anti-XM/Sirius merger group Consumer Coalition for Competition in Satellite Radio (C3SR) commissioned a study to support the theory that if the two companies are allowed to join forces, the government would be sanctioning a full-blown monopoly. But what may not be known about C3SR is that the organization, on some undisclosed level, is supported by the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB).
> 
> The report, composed by J. Gregory Sidak, former deputy general counsel for the Federal Communications Commission, was drafted with the intentions of being submitted to the FCC. But in fine print at the bottom of one of the study's pages, Sidak said that C3SR "is supported by the National Association of Broadcasters."
> 
> The connection between C3SR and NAB was first reported in a recent story by the Corporate Crime Reporter (CCR) which spoke with the group's founding member, Chris Reale - a part-time law student at George Washington University Law School. According to CCR, Reale also works full time at Williams Mullen Strategies - the lobbying arm of the Williams Mullen law firm - whose communications practice is headed by a former NAB assistant general counsel. The report also said that Reale acknowledges NAB's "support" of C3SR but "refuses to identify the nature" of said support.
> 
> On the heels of the Sidak report, NAB President and CEO David Rehr issued a statement in support of an FCC analysis that defined the relevant market for satellite radio services consisting "solely of XM and Sirius." When contacted by SkyREPORT, NAB Director of Media Relations Kristopher Jones said Rehr was referring to the agency's Annual Report of Satellite Communications Services, not the report commissioned by C3SR.
> 
> In the FCC's annual analysis, a section under satellite radio's market description does say "the participants in this market are the two SDARS providers, XM and Sirius." However, the report also said in describing relevant markets, "the FCC relies on antitrust law, economic theory, and the U.S. Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission Horizontal Merger Guidelines (and) this report is not an analysis of a proposed merger."
> 
> C3SR claims to be a consumer group of law students who subscribe to satellite radio that oppose the XM/Sirius merger to protect "consumers and independent programmers." As far as disclosing who funds the group, Reale told CCR that he didn't think it was a good idea because "it would detract from support from different groups."


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## Nick

*"the public interest remains better served by the preservation of competing service..." *

SkyReport:


> The National Association of Broadcasters continues to bombard members of Congress with anti-merger sentiments as Sirius and XM prepare to move forward as a unified company. In the latest round of attacks, NAB officials sent two new documents to congressional staffers highlighting more opposition to a merged satellite radio entity.
> 
> The first document NAB said opposes the merger came from Philip Napoli, director of the Donald McGannon Communication Research Center at Fordham University. In his report, Napoli claims "the public interest remains better served by the preservation of competing service providers seeking to provide the best possible service at the lowest possible price."
> 
> Also jumping on the anti-merger bandwagon is former Federal Trade Commission chair James Miller, who wrote in an opposition letter that "the merger of XM and Sirius would be contrary to the public interest."
> 
> Satellite radio executives responsible for testifying on behalf of the merger have repeatedly said consumers would not be harmed by the deal and that the marketplace will dictate the price of services. Although the proposed merged company has speculated that it would create a higher-tiered programming package, officials have noted that current subscription rates would remain after the deal is complete.


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## lwilli201

I wonder which service Imus will sign with?

Off topic, Sorry.


----------



## Nick

Actually, neither XM or Sirius are interested in Imus -- at least, at this time.
It could adversely impact the merger process.


----------



## machavez00

Nick said:


> Actually, neither XM or Sirius are interested in Imus -- at least, at this time.
> It could adversely impact the merger process.


It's been speculated that Sharpton et al would move to stop a merger if one or the other announced they were signing Imus. I can't remember which show it was but one of the guest claimed Imus did this in order to get out his contract to go to XM


----------



## Nick

*"My position opposing the XM/Sirius merger and supporting a significant
relaxation of local radio ownership rules is completely consistent..." *

SkyReport:


> In an admittedly "skewed" letter to the Federal Communications Commission, a high-profile Clear Channel Radio executive voiced opposition to the proposed $13 billion merger between Sirius and XM. Last week, the FCC's Deborah Tate received talking points against the proposed merger in an attempt to influence the commissioner with the company's position on the proposal.
> 
> According to PublicIntegrity.org, Clear Channel Vice President Thomas English wrote three possible responses aimed at helping the commissioner resolve previous statements in favor of relaxing media ownership limits. In the letter, English asks Tate how she "reconcile(s) your past recognition of all the entertainment options like iPods, internet radio, satellite radio, etc. available to consumers as one of the reasons for relaxing local radio ownership rules with your present concerns with a merger of XM and Sirius being a monopoly?"
> 
> Answering his own questions, the Clear Channel VP admits that the responses provided "were composed by our Government Affairs folks so they might be a little skewed toward our specific goals."
> 
> In a strange tactic, English wrote three answers in the first person beginning with: "My position opposing the XM/Sirius merger and supporting a significant relaxation of local radio ownership rules is completely consistent with my primary guiding principle: avoid government action that seriously distorts the marketplace."
> 
> English went on to write, "My main concern is how can free radio survive when a combined XM/Sirius would control more spectrum in every market in the country than the entire AM/FM band combined?" The exec also wrote, "I consistently oppose a regulatory system that would disadvantage free, terrestrial broadcasting."
> 
> One major issue with English's letter is that by law, anyone who wishes to communicate with the FCC in a formal proceeding must file an ex parte presentation - a procedure that documents outside parties' communication with the agency. A spokesperson from Tate's office said it is unknown why Clear Channel submitted talking points to the commissioner and disregard standard procedure.
> 
> The Senate Commerce Committee will be holding another hearing on the proposed XM/Sirius merger today at 10 a.m. ET.


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## machavez00

Nick said:


> *"My position opposing the XM/Sirius merger and supporting a significant
> relaxation of local radio ownership rules is completely consistent..." *
> 
> SkyReport:www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


Odd, considering CC programs bandwidth on XM. It sounds like CC is positioning itself for when its control ends in '08


----------



## Nick

* "Broadcasters' opposition to this merger and to satellite radio's provision of local
traffic, weather and emergency information is hypocritical given their own current
regulatory efforts to consolidate"*

SkyReport:


> The Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation held a hearing Tuesday to further discuss the potential $13 billion merger between the nation's two satellite radio providers, Sirius and XM. News of the merger has spurred heated debate on both sides of the fence, culminating with a slew of comments issued from company executives, regulators and competitive interests alike.
> 
> As expected, Sirius CEO Mel Karmazin again defended his company's interest in merging with its satellite radio competition saying despite recent attempts to bash the effort, a combined Sirius/XM entity would generate "concrete and significant benefits for consumers." The executive testified that through the merger, Sirius and XM could empower consumers by lowering pricing structures and offering more choices.
> 
> "Consumers who want fewer channels than currently offered will be able to select one or more packages for less than (the current subscription rate of) $12.95 per month," Karmazin said. Also, "Customers will be able to access popular, previously exclusive programming of the other provider for a modest premium over what they are paying now."
> 
> Karmazin added that when interoperable radios are commercially available, "consumers who want access to the complete offerings of both companies will be able to do so on a single device for significantly less than the current price of $25.90."
> 
> Committee Chairman Sen. Daniel Inouye said while he looked forward to hearing both sides of the debate, "I believe merger proponents, in this case, have a steep hill to climb. Indeed, given the public interest in promoting competition and maximizing a diversity of media outlets, we should be skeptical of claims that new technologies provide competition sufficient to restrain monopoly power."
> 
> But some of the most intriguing testimony from the hearing came via Gigi Sohn, president of the nonprofit, public interest organization Public Knowledge. In her remarks, Sohn posed a question to regulators that has yet to be discussed within the debate: "If this merger is simply denied, will consumers be better off?
> 
> "Given the financial state of both companies, the slowing growth of their customer base and the increasing competition in the marketplace, it appears likely that in the absence of a merger, both services will continue to limp along instead of investing in new and diverse programming," she said. "Might it not be better for consumers to permit the merger under conditions that provide expanded programming and pricing choice, along with temporary measures to keep prices in check?"
> 
> According to Sohn, the XM/Sirius merger should be approved if the following conditions are met: The new company makes available pricing choices such as tiered programming; makes 5 percent of its capacity available to non-commercial educational and informational programming over which it has no editorial control; and the new company agrees not to raise prices for its combined programming package for three years.
> 
> Sohn also made point to mention that Public Knowledge strongly opposes any merger condition involving limitations on consumers' ability to record satellite radio services, and that Congress and the FCC should permit satellite radio broadcasters to do more, not less, local programming.
> 
> "Broadcasters' opposition to this merger and to satellite radio's provision of local traffic, weather and emergency information is not only incredibly hypocritical given their own current regulatory efforts to consolidate, but it is also anticompetitive in its own right," Sohn said. "Even assuming that broadcasters take seriously their statutory duty to serve local communities with programming that serves local needs (and not just traffic and weather), there is no reason why, in 2007, any media service should have a government-granted monopoly over local programming."


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## Nick

*"The merger decision remains the largest milestone still ahead"*

SkyReport:


> Talk about the satellite radio companies has been centered recently on the proposed $13 billion merger between Sirius and XM. But in the midst of political posturing, competitive threats and anti-trust hearings, both satellite radio providers have been quietly preparing to reveal their respective performances for the first quarter of 2007.
> 
> XM Satellite Radio is set to release results tomorrow with a conference call in the morning. Many analysts are predicting less-than stellar results - but nothing that wasn't expected since the merger was announced last month.
> 
> According to Wedbush analyst William Kidd, XM's Q1 results should be in line with the company's relatively low expectations with net subscriber additions around 294,000 - just under the firm's original estimate of 303,000. "Although our $15 price target remains unchanged due to rounding, we note that minor changes to our model have resulted in a decrease of $162 million (48 cents per share) in our target valuation," Kidd said.
> 
> As for Sirius, the country's second largest satellite radio company is slated to announce results next Tuesday, May 1, with an early conference call. Kidd said he expects retail demand to be weak for the company during the first three months of 2007 not only due to the "prevailing retail downward trend" but also because XM may have gained some market share back from Sirius.
> 
> "The merger approval process and a difficult first-half 2007 continue to overshadow the company's valuation and a stronger second-half outlook," Kidd said. "The merger decision, which we expect in the August/September timeframe, remains the largest milestone still ahead for the company."


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## machavez00

MERGER CRITICS KEY ON KARMAZIN'S $31M PAY
http://www.nypost.com/seven/04292007/business/awful_timing_business_peter_lauria.htm


----------



## Nick

SkyReport:


> Years ago, GPS specialist Garmin International began partnering with XM Satellite Radio to provide ground and weather information to pilots by including XM receivers in it's products. Now, Garmin is arguing that if the proposed merger between XM and Sirius is approved, the Federal Communications Commission has a duty to ensure the union will not endanger general aviation safety by allowing the deal to deteriorate the company's relationship with XM.
> 
> Last week, Garmin filed a statement with the FCC that said the agency must condition any approval of the XM/Sirius merger on the continued long-term provision of XM's current aviation weather products. Specifically, Garmin's letter said the FCC "must, at a minimum" condition any XM/Sirius merger approval on continued provisions of XM's satellite service - like the one with the GPS company, for example - for a period of "at least 20 years."
> 
> According to the documents, Garmin said it spent around $3 million during a two-year period to develop and obtain the initial FAA aircraft certification requirements for its current black box system with integrated XM datalink receivers. The company said it spent an additional $1 million to develop the XM receiver and software used with its accompanying portable product line.
> 
> Garmin said that in February of last year, Sirius announced plans to team with WSI - another satellite-based weather information system - to develop products that will compete with the Garmin/XM service. The problem, Garmin said, is that the WSI/Sirius product is not "interoperable" with the Garmin/XM product.
> 
> In a move that could be seen as hitting below the belt, Garmin implies in its filing with the FCC that any promises made by XM and Sirius that the companies would develop a universal black box device compatible with both services should ring hollow. Why? Because, as Garmin points out, both XM and Sirius have "disregarded the FCC's mandates requiring interoperability in the general consumer market."
> 
> FCC rules require that both XM and Sirius "include a receiver that will permit end users to access all licensed satellite DARS systems that are operational or under construction." In other words, one receiver for both (or more) services. But Garmin proclaims, "both XM and Sirius certified 10 years ago that they would comply with the interoperability requirement, but neither has done so to date."
> 
> According to the transfer application that XM and Sirius filed in March, the satellite radio companies said these model-type receivers have been developed, but there is no "incentive" to subsidize their development, and "manufacturers have not expressed an interest in producing and distributing these radios."


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## Nick

SkyReport:


> Subscribers of XM Satellite Radio experienced widespread service outages earlier this week after a software glitch temporarily shut down one of the company's four satellites. The satcaster did its best to rectify the problem as quickly as possible, but the technical hiccup was a surprising reminder of how vulnerable satellite broadcasts are to problems in space.
> 
> Indeed, issues to space-bound platforms affect more than just XM, but the company's first two satellites went through their own share of technical problems - and now the birds are considered by the company to be "spares." And when the software upload problems began Monday, the entire satellite industry held its breath as the company was left with one broadcasting option.
> 
> Almost immediately, industry reports started speculating that the satellite software problems may have a serious impact on the company's proposed $13 billion merger with rival Sirius.
> 
> If approved, the merger would mostly have an affect on the satellite companies' everyday, ground-based business like customer service, marketing and sales. But executives already under pressure from lawmakers to explain how consumers would benefit from a combined entity could now be forced to answer questions about a la carte plans which would merge their broadcasting capabilities as well.
> 
> Any merged broadcasting efforts would likely require the manufacture of interoperable radio receivers - which would definitely require significant software upgrades to the satellite system. And if one software glitch can shut down a large portion of the company's east coast coverage, the combining of two separate engineering teams could create even more havoc for subscribers.


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## tomcrown1

"Democratic Sen. Herb Kohl of Wisconsin said he had sent a letter to the Justice Department and the Federal Communications Commission calling on them to oppose the deal on grounds that it would cause "substantial harm to competition and consumers."

"Such a result should be unacceptable under antitrust law and as a matter of communication policy," Kohl wrote to FCC Chairman Kevin Martin and the Justice Department's antitrust chief, Thomas Barnett"

More Here

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2135561,00.asp


----------



## Nick

SkyReport:


> A day after the antitrust subcommittee chairman blasted the proposed merger between Sirius and XM, while at the same time Latino community leaders were praising it, debate over the $13 billion deal seemed to reach new levels this week. Adding to the fervor surrounding the hot-button issue was Sirius CEO Mel Karmazin admitting to shareholders that the likelihood of regulators approving the deal seem very, well, unlikely.
> 
> The latest verbal exchange hitting industry reports this week started on Wednesday when Senate Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights Chairman Herb Kohl (D-WI), concluded that satellite radio was its own market and a merger to consolidate the industry's two major players would leave said market void of a competitive alternative. The Wisconsin Democrat urged regulators to take "all necessary actions to deny approval of this merger and prevent the creation of this satellite radio monopoly."
> 
> It seems Kohl's comments may have been the proverbial straw on Karmazin's back, as the executive told investors yesterday that the proposed merger between Sirius and its rival XM is a major "uphill battle." Despite the turn in outlook, Karmazin maintained that the merger deserves to be approved by government regulators even though Wall Street estimates an "80 percent likelihood that the merger is not going to happen."
> 
> Responding to Kohl's comments, Karmazin said, "There are some people out there that think that any combination is bad. The NAB is a very powerful... very well-oiled lobbying organization." The exec added that many members of Congress "have unique relationships with their local radio station (because) Congressmen and Senators in every market of the country (have) a local radio station that covers their speeches."
> 
> Meanwhile, the merger got some unexpected support this week when the board of directors of The Latino Coalition (TLC) went public with their endorsement of the deal, saying the merger is beneficial to the satellite radio industry. TLC President Robert de Posada said traditional radio companies have ignored the Latino market for "far too long" and that "Hispanics must turn to alternative sources like satellite radio for Spanish-language news, sports, music and diverse cultural programming." The coalition said eliminating duplicate programming and expanding channel capacity will provide new opportunities for Hispanics.
> 
> Reports have said that as of the end of March, XM and Sirius had spent a combined $13 million on the merger. But if the deal fails to be approved, Karmazin said Sirius' business model is still on track and the nation's second largest satellite radio provider "will be a very successful, profitable company down the road."
> 
> In related XM news, the satcaster said it would provide refunds to subscribers who were affected by its service outage earlier this week. The company said customers who request a refund will receive a credit for two days of service on a future bill.


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## Nick

*NAB Hires Professionals to Help Kill Merger*

SkyReport:


> The National Association of Broadcasters recently hired the lobbying services of Bluewater Strategies to help the group oppose the proposed satellite radio merger of XM and Sirius. Filed with the Senate Office of Public Records last week, lobbyists Tim Kurth, Andrew Lundquist and former Washington Republican representative George Nethercutt said they would be representing the NAB with regards to the merger and other issues.
> 
> The hiring of Bluewater is the latest move by NAB officials in their attempt to have the $13 billion proposed deal opposed by the government. The maneuver is also the latest attempt at bolstering its stance by adding prominant Republicans, including former Virginia Attorney General Jerry Kilgore to lobby against the merger.
> 
> Bluewater said that in addition to opposing the merger and other antitrust related issues, the lobbying firm will also take on advertising restrictions on broadcasting and performance royalty taxes. It the firm's filing, Bluewater said the tax is a separate battle NAB is forging with musicians' groups over copyright regulations.


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## Paul Secic

This deal was DOA.


----------



## Nick

SkyReport:


> As if there weren't enough parties chiming in on the potential $13 billion satellite radio merger, two more groups have thrown their hats into the rink. This week, the League of Rural Voters and another law firm released opposing statements on whether Sirius and XM should be allowed to join forces.
> 
> Coming out in support of the proposed deal, the League of Rural Voters urged the Federal Communications Commission to approve the merger saying the combined company would offer listeners in rural communities more programming options at lower prices than those currently available from the two companies separately. The League's director said that in rural America, terrestrial radio reception is limited and satellite has offered listeners an attractive alternative.
> 
> According to the group, "consolidation of the commercial, over-the-air radio industry over the past decade has left much of rural America behind... as locally-owned stations are replaced with corporate conglomerates... with so-called local news and weather." By supporting the merger, the League also pointed out that rural listeners depend on satellite radio's emergency and public safety stations.
> 
> However, those following the merger debate closely know that the National Association of Broadcasters has lead the charge in opposing any satellite radio union. The NAB released yet another study by international law firm Crowell and Moring that called the proposed merger of XM and Sirius anticompetitive.
> 
> "The proposed merger would replace this duopoly market structure, set up specifically by the FCC to ensure at least some level of price and service competition, with a monopolist in the downstream subscription market... that is unrestrained in its ability to harm competition," the report said. "There simply is no 'fix' that will restore the competitive structure of this marketplace, and thus DOJ should challenge the transaction to preserve existing and future competition."


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## Nick

*merger...an uphill battle *

SkyReport:


> Opposition to a unified satellite radio industry seems to be mounting, and executives from both Sirius and XM have said a merger between the two is looking like an uphill battle. But the latest move by the companies seems to imply that they believe the deal is far from over, and whether or not regulators approve the $13 billion proposal won't keep them from going down without a fight.
> 
> According to a federal disclosure form filed by the companies, Sirius and XM have hired the high-profile public relations firm Quinn Gillespie & Associates to lobby the government on the proposed merger. The firm was founded by Jack Quinn, who served as counsel to former-President Bill Clinton from 1995 to 1997, and Ed Gillespie, a Republican Party strategist who served as the Republican National Committee chair during the 2004 election cycle.
> 
> In addition, several other former Capitol Hill veterans and White House officials are registered to lobby on behalf of the satellite radio companies. Others listed in the disclosure form include: Jeff Connaughton, former special assistant to the counsel to Clinton (1994-95); Kevin D. Kayes, most recently chief counsel to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, (D-Nev.); Allison Giles, former chief of staff to the House Ways and Means Committee under then-Chairman Bill Thomas, (R-Calif.); Elizabeth Hogan, former special assistant to the Commerce Department; and, Christopher McCannell, former chief of staff to Rep. Joseph Crowley, (D-N.Y.).
> 
> Under a federal law, lobbyists are required to disclose activities that could influence members of the executive and legislative branches. They must register with Congress within 45 days of being hired or engaging in lobbying.
> 
> In related news, Sirius said it has obtained a $250 million senior secured term loan commitment from Morgan Stanley Senior Funding. The facility will mature in five and one-half years and have covenants substantially similar to those under the company's existing 9 5/8 percent Senior Notes, Sirius said.


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## Nick

The American Antitrust Institute, an independent Washington-based non-profit
organization, filed comments with the FCC opposing the proposed merger of
XM and Sirius Satellite Radio. The group said that competition between the
companies has provided, and will continue to provide, benefits to consumers.
"There is no good reason for the commission to abandon its policy of ensuring
competition in the delivery of spectrum-based services in satellite DARS." - _SkyReport_


----------



## dishnh

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. communications regulators on Friday took a step forward in reviewing Sirius Satellite Radio Inc.'s (SIRI.O: Quote, Profile, Research) proposed acquisition of XM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc. (XMSR.O: Quote, Profile, Research).

The Federal Communications Commission said it formally opened its review of the deal for public comment, a move that starts a 180-day review clock.

The FCC has a 180-day target for completing merger reviews, although the target is not binding and the agency sometimes takes longer to evaluate major transactions.

Sirius plans to buy XM in a deal that would combine the only two providers of satellite radio service in the United States and has sparked concerns among some U.S. lawmakers and consumer groups.

The deal is currently being reviewed by both the Justice Department and the FCC, which issued both satellite radio licenses in 1997 on the condition the two companies would never merge.


----------



## Steve Mehs

Cool. So by December 8th, we can put this nonsence behind us and XM and Sirius can go back to business as usual.


----------



## James Long

> The FCC has a 180-day target for completing merger reviews, although the target is not binding and the agency sometimes takes longer to evaluate major transactions.


I would not count on it being over by December 8th.


----------



## Steve Mehs

There may be some last ditch efforts, but I expect by then it will be pretty much all but offical the merger will not happen.


----------



## bdowell

James Long said:


> I would not count on it being over by December 8th.


I agree with comments in the post above (not the quote above, but the comments above) that it'll be *over* by December 8th, having been killed by regulators...


----------



## Nick

SkyReport:


> Now that the Federal Communications Commission has officially launched its inquiry into the merger between Sirius and XM, the satellite radio companies are undoubtedly feeling the pressure to convince regulators that the proposal is a good idea. Nailing home that fact, the companies launched a well-targeted advertising campaign hoping to sway the right people into approving the $13 billion dollar union.
> 
> The ad campaign, appearing in several publications on Capitol Hill, boasts of the legions of groups who have come out in favor of the merger. The advertisements ran yesterday in highly-visable publications like Communications Daily, The Hill, The Politico and Roll Call.
> 
> Among the organizations that have voiced their support for the merger, and subsequently appeared within the campaign, are: League of Rural Voters, National Consumers League, National Black Chamber of Commerce, Hispanic Foundation, The Latino Coalition, League of United Latin American Citizens, New York State Federation of Hispanic Chambers of Commerce, and Women Involved in Farm Economics.
> 
> According to the companies, each of the ad's signatories have already filed comments with the FCC citing satellite radio's program diversity and "the merger's potential to strengthen or expand such programs and channels as primary reasons for their support." Interested parties can view the ad at http://www.xmmerger.com.
> 
> In related news, the National Association of Broadcasters unveiled its latest attempt to thwart the satellite radio deal by launching a website dedicated to opposing the merger. In celebration of the site, NAB said it has hung a giant banner outside its D.C. headquarters reading "Do the Math: XM + Sirius = Monopoly. Check it out at http://www.xmsiriusmonopoly.com if you like.


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## harsh

As if lobbying groups like the NAB and RIAA aren't too powerful.


----------



## Nick

SkyReport:


> SkyFILES: Desperation Time for DARS Deal?
> 
> Is it desperation time for the proposed merger of satellite radio giants?
> 
> The pending combination of XM and Sirius has found support, and some of it comes from unusual locations. Last week, the League of Rural Voters urged the Federal Communications Commission to approve the merger. And on Tuesday, Women Involved in Farm Economics (WIFE) endorsed the possible DARS combination.
> 
> On Wednesday, XM and Sirius presented a full-page ad in Capitol Hill publications referring to the support they have for their merger. While the deal has attracted organizations on the periphery, it also picked up endorsements from bigger groups such as the National Consumers League, National Black Chamber of Commerce, Hispanic Federation, the Latino Coalition and League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC).
> 
> It's an odd mix of supporters. And while some of the groups may be out of the ordinary, they don't appear to be astro-turf organizations (though it's difficult to determine the exact status of some of the groups). WIFE, for example, claims to have been in existence since 1976.
> 
> The support from minority-minded groups is good for the deal. And while the XM/Sirius combination has the backing of the politically astute in remote America and agricultural moms coast-to-coast, the merger still isn't gaining fans on Capitol Hill, at the Portals or among other key Beltway constituencies. Broadcasters keep lobbying against the merger. No one is stepping up to the plate for the companies within the legislative and regulatory scene.
> 
> That's maybe why Sirius and XM hired high-profile public relations firm Quinn Gillespie and Associates to lobby the government on the proposal.
> 
> Also, Wall Street is beginning to view the pending transaction as being rather unimpressive. As one blogger in the financial community stated this week, "Am I the only one who wonders why they (XM and Sirius) are even bothering?"
> 
> At this point, both XM and Sirius have to go through the motions of trying to get regulatory approval for the deal. There are a lot of people that expect that to happen. And yet while they toil through the merger process during the coming months, it could be painful for everyone to watch.


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## Nick

*"After a thorough analysis, it is my opinion that the merger of
XM and SIRIUS will predictably enhance consumer welfare." 
- Thomas Hazlett, former Chief Economist for the FCC*

SkyReport:


> XM/Sirius Boasts Benefits of XiriuM
> 
> Plenty of groups have come out of the woodwork to blast XM and Sirius in their attempt to merge. But now the shoe seems to be on the other foot, as a highly visible economist and former government bigwig has come to the plan's defense.
> 
> Undoubtedly, the satellite radio companies were pleased when former Chief Economist for the Federal Communications Commission, professor of law and economics at George Mason University, and Arlington Economics principal Thomas Hazlett released a study supporting the proposed $13 billion merger between Sirius and XM. Titled "The Economics of the Satellite Radio Merger," Hazlett concludes that the deal offers potential to yield "substantial efficiencies within the audio entertainment marketplace." The study was prepared for the companies and filed with the FCC last week.
> 
> Said Hazlett, "After a thorough analysis, it is my opinion that the merger of XM and SIRIUS will predictably enhance consumer welfare. The National Association of Broadcasters' (NAB) staunch opposition to the merger illustrates their similar expectation. The improved economic vitality of a combined satellite radio company would drive industry innovation, promote competition and enhance programming and pricing options for customers."
> 
> Other findings from the report, which claims the merger will increase competition among audio entertainment providers, include: AM/FM radio, in fact, does compete with satellite radio as evidenced by terrestrial stations' long-standing opposition to satellite competition and to the proposed merger. If the terrestrial broadcasters genuinely believed the merger would substantially increase consumer prices, the study said, they would support - not oppose -the plan seeing that higher costs for satellite radio would create larger audiences and ad revenues for them.
> 
> The study also said that since satellite radio first appeared, "broadcasters have consistently attempted to restrain the new service to protect their interests at the expense of market competition." Hazlett said there are many reasons why Wall Street analysts have been arguing in favor of the transaction long before the companies announced their plans.
> 
> The study can be viewed in its entirety at http://www.xmmerger.com.


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## Nick

*"...we believe that sanctioning the marriage of the only competitors
in the satellite radio market...would be devastating to consumers."*

SkyReport:


> When satellite radio officials acknowledged that getting lawmakers to approve a merger between XM and Sirius was an "uphill battle," they may have been putting it mildly. The latest blow to the companies' plans came in the form of a letter signed by 72 members of the House of Representatives opposing the proposed $13 billion deal.
> 
> The letter, being circulated to the press by the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB), was sent Monday to FCC Chairman Kevin Martin, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, and Federal Trade Commission Chair Deborah Platt Majoras. According to the organization, the letter was written by Reps. Gene Green (D-TX), vice chair of the Subcommittee on Health, and Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI), the second highest ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee.
> 
> In all, 47 Democrats and 25 Republicans signed the letter which reads, "On its face, we believe that sanctioning the marriage of the only competitors in the satellite radio market would create a monopoly which would be devastating to consumers."
> 
> Among the Democrats who signed the letter are: Budget Committee Chair John Spratt (D-S.C.), Agriculture Committee Chair Collin Peterson (D-Minn.), Rules Committee Chair Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.), and Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio). Republicans who jumped on board include: former House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.), Republican Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), and National Republican Congressional Committee Chairman Tom Cole (R-Okla.).


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## Nick

Once again, this latest assault on the merger effort has the NAB's anti-competitive
fingerprints all over it. It makes this writer wonder why broadcasters are so afraid
of the idea of competing against a single, merged sat radio entity. Could it be that
they recognize that the merger could actually benefit consumers in the long run?

Anything that the NAB is against, I am for, and anything that those bought and
paid for members of congress are for, I am against, including the billions voted
for aircraft that the U.S. Air force says it does not want or need.

Once again, it is apparent that neither Congress or the NAB has the interests of
the people at heart.


----------



## Nick

*"NAB makes our argument that we are competing with them"*

SkyReport:


> Does NAB Effort Actually Support Merger?
> 
> It's an interesting theory: The National Association of Broadcasters' (NAB) full-throttle approach to opposing the Sirius/XM merger is effectually working against the organization. That's what Sirius CEO Mel Karmazin hinted in an interview with TWICE. The exec said that although NAB's campaign was "predictable," the message the organization is sending actually proves the point that satellite radio does, in fact, compete with terrestrial radio and a Sirius/XM union would not create a monopoly.
> 
> In a TWICE news release, Karmazin allegedly told the mag that NAB's response "makes our argument that we are competing with them, and if we are competing with them, then their message that this is a duopoly becoming a monopoly can't be true because why are they involved? If it was a market called satellite radio, why should they care what happens to satellite radio if it did not compete with them."
> 
> The exec's comments came after the broadcaster's group both issued a letter asking the satellite radio companies to withdraw their merger application and when hung a giant banner outside of its highly-visible D.C. headquarters urging regulators to oppose the deal.
> 
> ~~~~~
> 
> In related news, the Second District of the African Methodist Episcopal Church, with 150,000 members spanning Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina and D.C., came out in support of the merger. The group said the variety of programming available on satellite radio, including the modern gospel station Praise, music stations showcasing African American talent, and sports commentary "has provided the African American community with a significant new source of information, entertainment and spiritual fulfillment."


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## Richard King

It's a done deal..... 
http://www.quote.com/qc/news/story.aspx?story=66722209
I wouldn't want to go up against these people. :lol:


----------



## Nick

*"...there are clear differences between the DBS market...
and the expanding audio entertainment market today."*

SkyReport:


> One of the knocks on the proposed satellite radio merger is that a combined Sirius/XM would resemble a combined EchoStar/DIRECTV - an entity that kept regulators from approving the DBS merger in 2002. Now, a new study shows that there are clear differences between the two scenarios, and the failed attempts of DBS to merge should not be used as a barometer to judge against satellite radio's attempts now.
> 
> According to the League of Rural Voters, a group that recently went public with its support of the merger, there are clear differences between the DBS market in 2002 when EchoStar and DIRECTV tried to merge and the expanding audio entertainment market today. In the EchoStar/DIRECTV case, the FCC determined that there were only two DBS providers, but "the commission's review of the proposed merger in 2002 provides no guidance to the analysis applicable here." Further, the League said, "this is because the product markets at issue in the two transactions are fundamentally different."
> 
> The paper cites the 2002 FCC analysis of the EchoStar/DirecTV market, which narrowly defined each local market as the two DBS providers and the local cable provider. This is in contrast to the "broad and competitive audio entertainment market in which satellite radio competes," a market that today includes terrestrial radio, internet radio, iPods and other MP3 players, CD players and mobile phones. The FCC also found there were significant barriers to entry in the DBS merger. "This concern is moot in the satellite radio market, given the multitude of other competitors that have already entered the field and the anticipated release of future competitors such as HD radio and the Apple iPhone," the study said.
> 
> As far as the impact on rural consumers goes, the study said the narrow finding on the DBS product market gave rise to a number of concerns, including the reduction of viewpoint diversity and the creation of a monopoly in areas where there was no cable. "The FCC found that DBS operators contribute to viewpoint diversity by playing a 'gatekeeper role' that 'clearly affects' which entertainment and news programming is available," the paper says. "The audio entertainment market does not present the same concern, since it includes many different providers/editors."
> 
> Additionally, the league's analysis said that the FCC's concerns in the DBS case do not apply to satellite radio because of its small saturation in a rapidly growing market, noting "the proposed merger between XM and Sirius comes at a time of strong and growing competition... In fact, even a merged satellite radio provider would possess a slight market share and be constrained by the multiplicity of other media."


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## Nick

*"...deal will allow the satellite radio to offer
a more appealing product to subscribers"*

SkyReport:


> Two more groups have filed comments with the Federal Communications Commission in support of the proposed merger between Sirius and XM. Americans for Tax Reform (ATR) and the 60-Plus Association both issued statements saying they support the companies' efforts to create one satellite radio superpower.
> 
> In a joint release, the groups said the proposed $13 billion deal will allow the satellite radio segment of the audio entertainment delivery industry to offer a more appealing product to subscribers.
> 
> "This merger would create an appealing product for many consumers interested in multiple audio options," said Grover Norquist, President of Americans for Tax Reform. "The companies have broken new ground in offering consumers the ability to block channels and receive a credit for what they have blocked, without being forced by regulation to do so, therefore creating an alternative that will appeal to people of all age groups and sensibilities."
> 
> The group's statement said that satellite radio currently is only comprising about three percent of the audio entertainment market, and a combined entity would make the product more attractive in a free market. The organizations believe the merger will enable fans of satellite radio programming, like exclusive sports coverage, terrestrially-restricted shock jocks and clean-livin' family programs, to create programming packages that appeal to their individual needs through a voluntary a la carte system that XM and Sirius have promised.
> 
> "This is a testament not only to their commitment to families, but to the free market," Norquist said. "No regulations were needed to impose this concept; it came about out of a void in the market they think exists. Kudos to them for this interesting and bold step in a new direction not offered on terrestrial radio."
> 
> Americans for Tax Reform (ATR) is a non-partisan coalition of taxpayers and taxpayer groups who oppose all federal, state and local tax increases.


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## Nick

*"Merging with XM will allow our blend of family-friendly
and faith-based news to reach an even larger audience"*

SkyReport:


> FamilyNet Radio, the home of Christian talk radio on Sirius, came out this week in support for the proposed merger between its host and rival satellite radio company XM. In order to help satellite radio "survive," FamilyNet officials said the network would support any efforts of the companies that would benefit the public.
> 
> Broadcast on Sirius 161, FamilyNet offers Christian talk to the company's subscriber base - so it should come as no surprise that the network would support a merger to increase its reach. Said FamilyNet COO R. Martin Coleman, "Merging with XM will allow our blend of family-friendly and faith-based news to reach an even larger audience, many in remote areas who would otherwise not have access through traditional terrestrial radio."
> 
> In a letter to the Federal Communications Commission, Coleman said the proposed merger would enhance consumer choice and the ability of Christian programmers to offer increased programming options to listeners. "Audio programmers will continue to have many distribution avenues available to them after this merger. In fact, the merger will create more programming opportunities on satellite radio, by enabling Sirius and XM to remove duplicative channels."
> 
> Coleman said he believes the merger will allow consumers to enjoy the best of both satellite radio services at a combined cost of less than what it would cost to purchase both today.


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## Nick

*The (FCC) is thinking whether it should "waive, modify or repeal the prohibition"*

SkyReport:


> Opponents of the proposed satellite radio merger between Sirius and XM may try to downplay the latest turn of events in the ongoing debate. But make no mistake, what the Federal Communications Commission is pondering could have a monumental effect on the lingering $13 billion deal.
> 
> How big? Like making the 'no-unified-satellite-radio-operator' regulation a thing of the past.
> 
> The latest scoop is that the commission is wondering whether the language in it's original 1997 order - language that prohibits a combination of the only two companies granted authority to offer satellite radio services in the U.S. - actually "constitutes a binding commission rule." And if that isn't eye-popping enough, the agency also is thinking whether it should "waive, modify or repeal the prohibition" if it would serve the public interest.
> 
> The FCC's 1997 SDARS Report and Order says, "...After DARS licenses are granted, one licensee will not be permitted to acquire control of the other remaining satellite DARS license... to help assure sufficient continuing competition." But XM and Sirius seem to have found a major loophole, saying the language in the order is only a policy statement - and not a binding commission rule - because the wording was never codified as a federal regulation.
> 
> And, according to FCC documents, Sirius and XM also say that the prohibition need not be continued "because the preservation of two separate satellite radio licenses is no longer required" to fuel competition. In fact, the companies say, it is the prohibition itself that is no longer serving the public interest.
> 
> The revelation could be seen by opponents of the deal as grasping for straws, but it doesn't seem to be so simple. The FCC has issued a Notice of Proposed Rule Making on the topic and is now currently seeking comments on whether the companies' contention holds water - and whether it should "waive, modify or repeal" the rule.
> 
> Late Tuesday, the merger's most vocal opponent - the National Association of Broadcasters - issued a statement regarding the FCC's Notice. Said NAB EVP Dennis Wharton, "NAB is pleased the FCC is asking tough questions about this proposed government-sanctioned monopoly. We're hopeful that in the final analysis, regulators will conclude that competition serves consumers better than a monopoly, particularly when XM and Sirius have said repeatedly that they are not failing businesses."


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## Richard King

http://www.quote.com/qc/news/story.aspx?story=66838598
Report From Prominent Economist and Former FCC Commissioner Furchtgott-Roth Concludes XM-SIRIUS Merger Will Benefit Consumers


> Harold W. Furchtgott-Roth, a prominent economist and the former Commissioner of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), today released a study regarding the proposed merger of XM Satellite Radio (NASDAQ:XMSR) and SIRIUS Satellite Radio (NASDAQ:SIRI).
> 
> The paper, "An Economic Review of the Proposed Merger of XM and Sirius," explores the economic considerations that government agencies should take into account when reviewing the proposed XM-SIRIUS merger. The paper was prepared for XM and SIRIUS and was filed yesterday at the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) as part of the companies' merger application.


More....

I am starting to think this thing might actually happen.


----------



## Nick

*"...the FCC is considering a rule change that would
reverse the current license provision that prevents
the companies from joining forces"*

SkyReport:


> DARS Preview: What to Expect from Q2
> 
> Both XM and Sirius have been on the minds of many during the past several months as regulators begin to decipher the raging debate surrounding the companies' proposed merger. Wall Street especially has been paying close attention, and analysts are now preparing to take a stab at how the nation's satellite radio players are performing so far this year.
> 
> According to Wedbush Morgan's William Kidd, XM seems to have sustained its first quarter market share gains which has led the analyst to positively revise his second quarter net adds. And although retail sales for both satellite radio companies continue to be "anemic," Kidd said XM is the one to have rebuilt much of its market share lost to Sirius last year. With this in mind, Kidd increased his Q2 net additions to 295,000 (from 235,000) on a stronger-than-anticipated retail showing.
> 
> The analyst also said a strong OEM result could push XM ahead of forecast. "In spite of our revised Q2 net adds estimate, we believe the incremental direction from Q1 is positive," Kidd said. "OEM sales for both Sirius and XM should show progress throughout the remainder of 2007." Out of the two companies, it is XM which has a greater potential to positively surprise, he said.
> 
> As for Sirius, Kidd said he expects the merger process to continue to overshadow the company's operational results, which should show a positive transition to an OEM-driven mix from retail. The analyst raised his Q2 net adds estimate from 423,000 to 460,000 with OEM gross adds jumping from 419,000 to 526,000.
> 
> "Bear in mind, we expect retail sales to continue to be soft, as mid-quarter NPD data suggested that retail sales were down roughly 20 percent Y-o-Y and that XM was holding its recent market share gains at -45 percent," Kidd said.
> 
> With regards to the merger, Kidd said now that the FCC is considering a rule change that would reverse the license provision that currently prevents the companies from joining forces, "the issue of market definitions will dominate the regulatory thought process, with regulators having to decide whether or not substitutes, like MP3s and free radio, could serve to restrain a monopoly's pricing power." Also, the analyst said, regulators must determine whether customers would benefit from a combined XM/Sirius entity.


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## Nick

SkyReport:


> Reps. Bart Stupak (D-MI) and Steven LaTourette (R-OH) wrote a joint letter to both the Federal Communications Commission chair and the assistant attorney general opposing the proposed merger between XM and Sirius. Referring to the deal as a government-sanctioned monopoly, Stupak and LaTourette urged the Department of Justice and the FCC to "preserve national radio competition, and safeguard the interests of American consumers by denying" the merger.
> 
> Addressed to the FCC's Kevin Martin and Assistant AG Thomas Barnett, the Congress members said their constituents have embraced satellite radio as a supplement to free over-the-air radio and have "benefited greatly" from Sirius and XM competing head-to-head. According to the letter, it's been this competition that has kept prices down, increased innovation and strengthened customer service across the satellite radio sector.
> 
> "With no viable competition in the national market, a combined XM-Sirius satellite radio monopoly could easily raise prices without losing existing subscribers. Even the promised price caps would provide only temporary protection to consumers, and are an acknowledgment themselves of the monopoly power resulting from a merger," the Congressmen said. "Free over-the-air radio is not enough of a competitor to satellite radio to keep the satellite subscription prices down... The FCC has not adequately enforced other consumer protections in this market, such as the creation of interoperable satellite radio devices."
> 
> The letter also said that unlike terrestrial radio, XM and Sirius benefit from a national footprint which allows them to reach into "every corner in America." OTA radio stations, on the other hand, are restricted to their FCC-licensed broadcast reach.
> 
> "And unlike iPods and Mp3 players, both Sirius and XM can provide immediate and live broadcast service of national programming," the letter said.
> 
> In related news, the FCC said the first round of comments on its proposed rule change regarding the transfer of the companies' satellite radio licenses is due Aug. 13. Reply comments are due later that month, Aug. 27.


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## Nick

*"XM and Sirius may operate above the
Earth, but they are not above the law..."*

SkyReport:


> The National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) earlier this week urged members of the FCC to move forward in releasing information about XM and Sirius' operations in relation to the agency's rules governing FM modulators and terrestrial repeaters. The broadcaster group said the information "is inextricably linked" to the satellite radio companies' application to merge.
> 
> The NAB said it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with the FCC earlier this year. The filing is seeking yet-to-be released information related to what the NAB alleges are the satellite radio companies' "history of rules violations."
> 
> Following a ruling that allowed a partial release, NAB said XM and Sirius - as well as some current and former employees - filed applications to review the requested information. The subsequent requests ended up delaying what the group said is the release of "key facts which hold a direct bearing on XM and Sirius' merger application."
> 
> Said NAB Executive Vice President of Media Relations Dennis Wharton, "XM and Sirius may operate above the Earth, but they are not above the law. Their continued reluctance to fully disclose key facts related to past violations is yet another example of why these two companies should not be trusted with monopoly power."


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## Nick

*"joining forces would benefit people of many faiths"*

SkyReport:


> Maybe its a sign from above, but XM and Sirius have found some heavenly support for their proposed $13 billion merger now being discussed at the Federal Communications Commission. It seems both satellite radio providers found themselves in good company when "His Eminence" Edward Cardinal Egan, the Archbishop of New York, decided to come out in support of the companies' pending union.
> 
> During the weekend, Cardinal Egan wrote in his New York Post opinion piece that the companies' desire to join forces would be a benefit to people of many faiths. Using Sirius' "The Catholic Channel" as a deserving platform, the religious leader said a unified satellite radio company presents "a unique opportunity for the Church to speak with people - Catholic and non-Catholic alike. I would urge all those who are considering the merger between Sirius and XM to see to it that this dialog of faith can continue."
> 
> Executives from both Sirius and XM said they are pleased to receive support from such a highly regarded and influential spiritual leader.
> 
> In a joint statement, Sirius and XM touted their offerings of multiple music, talk and entertainment channels for the country's people of faith. In addition to The Catholic Channel, Sirius said it now offers the EWTN Global Catholic Network which features live call-in talk shows, daily devotions and informative teaching series. XM, the companies said, also offers "a variety of faith-based programming," including The Message, a destination for customers to hear a variety of Christian pop music.


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission

Full text of Cardinal Egan's NYPost column - "THE GOOD WORD - VIA SATELLITE"

*"...a Jewish woman from New York, told me that she had been listening to The
Catholic Channel and was struck by how much common ground our faiths share."*


----------



## IndyMichael

http://www.xmmerger.com/


----------



## Nick

*"...a unified satellite radio industry would no doubt be
in the public's best interest"; (but) analysts feel the real
developments are yet to come...*

SkyReport:


> In a move being seen as an attempt to please federal regulators, officials at Sirius and XM said that if the companies are allowed to join forces, the newly combined company would offer consumers in the U.S. the choice of a la carte programming. With the lower-cost service option, the companies are hoping to show that a unified satellite radio industry would no doubt be in the public's best interest.
> 
> According to the companies, subscribers will have the option of buying a "basic" package of 50 channels for as low as $6.99 - nearly half of what satellite radio customers of either company are used to paying now. A second tier a la carte option will offer customers a 100-channel package.
> 
> What makes the announcement interesting is that with an a la carte system, Sirius customers would have the ability to choose some channels that are available exclusively on XM - and XM subs from Sirius channels as well. The companies said the two a la carte packages would be available to subscribers within a year of the merger.
> 
> While the companies hope the news pleases those at the Federal Communications Commission, not all are as excited about the development as Sirius and XM. In maintaining its staunch opposition to the proposed merger, the National Association of Broadcasters did not take long to blast the a la carte maneuver.
> 
> "Policymakers should not be hoodwinked by the announcement, since nothing is stopping either XM or Sirius from individually offering consumers a more affordable choice in limited program packages," said NAB EVP of media relations Dennis Wharton." After reading the fine print, one discovers that XM and Sirius customers have to buy a new radio for an undisclosed fee to reap the alleged rewards" of an a la carte system.
> 
> Wharton also said that two "hotly-competitive" companies like XM and Sirius would "promise anything to become a monopoly."


*Karmazin Speaks About Merger Benefits*



> With a speech in front of the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., Sirius Satellite Radio CEO Mel Karmazin discussed just how a unified Sirius/XM would modify its pricing structure to benefit customers nationwide. During his presentation, the exec offered details about an a la carte strategy and family-friendly and themed tiers all designed to give subscribers options with their satellite radio programming.
> 
> And while Press Club members and investors alike took notice of Karmazin's speech Monday, some market analysts feel the real developments are yet to come.
> 
> "We think the announcement is addressed far more to the Federal Communications Commission and would make it more difficult for the FCC to say no - if the Department of Justice says yes," said Stifel Nicolaus' Blair Levin. "In terms of the DOJ, the more important new development will come (Tuesday) when the companies file their economic analysis at the FCC, which we expect to provide evidence of how pricing behavior demonstrates that the market should be seen as audio (or mobile audio) rather than just satellite radio, how other options both are and could constrain unilateral behavior, and how the merger will lead to synergies that could enable consumer benefits."
> 
> Levin said the firm would have to digest today's filings before reevaluating their position on the likelihood of the merger being approved, regardless of the waves of opposition sure to follow whatever is discovered. Monday's developments are "helpful to the merger's proponents in creating a more concrete narrative that will help supporters in Congress and in the public policy arena to make their case," he said.
> 
> Still, Levin said the most important hurdle for the merger is with the DOJ - not with the FCC.


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## Nick

*In an inexplicable move, NPR bites the dog that feeds it*

SkyReport:


> Using familiar "monopoly" terminology, National Public Radio officials recently filed a petition with the Federal Communications Commission to deny the proposed merger between Sirius and XM. What seems to make this public opposition unique from earlier dissent is that NPR is the first programmer - carried on both satellite radio platforms - to contest the transaction.
> 
> In a summary of the group's 32 page petition, NPR said it is a goal of the FCC to maximize diversity in points-of-view available to the public over mass media outlets. The "fundamental policy goal" stems from the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment, the organization said, which "rests on the assumption that the widest possible dissemination of information from diverse and antagonistic sources is essential to the welfare of the public."
> 
> In NPR's petition, the group said "reducing the number of (satellite radio) providers from two to one would substantially harm the diversity of voices to the detriment of program producers, including NPR and NPR member station licensees, and ultimately the public. While it is unclear how much programming overlap exists between the services, eliminating one of the two providers would clearly affect the editorial decision-making that results in the current (satellite radio) program offerings."
> 
> With specific regard to NPR and other public radio outlets, the organization said it fears a unified satellite radio provider would reduce the amount and quality of public radio programming offered via the satellite radio platform. "A monopoly (satellite radio) provider would certainly be able to demand less favorable licensing terms, thereby forcing NPR and others to decide between program quality and carriage," the petition said.
> 
> However, if the FCC approves the merger, NPR officials suggested the agency should do so only after imposing comprehensive structural and regulatory conditions on the deal. The petition said the FCC should require all satellite radio receivers have the capabilities to receive HD Radio; return sufficient spectrum licenses to permit a post-merger second satellite radio provider; and at least until the restoration of intra-modal competition, a tariff-like regulatory regime to scrutinize the merged company's service offerings and pricing options.


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission

Editorial Comment: _I am still scratching my head over this surprising and irrational
move on the part of National Public Radio. The only reason I can come up with to
explain the fuzzy thinking on the part of the NPR leadership is that they are under
the influence -- of the NAB._


----------



## djlong

WHAT is NPR smoking? That last paragraph is just... I can't come up with words.. What planet are they on?


----------



## machavez00

NPR is po'ed because more people pay to listen to XMPR than listen to them free or donate


----------



## Nick

*"Obviously, the two companies are offering (the) a la carte
carrot to placate Federal Trade Commission officials."*

The Retail Bridge:


> *What Will A La Carte Mean For XM, Sirius Customers?*
> 
> By Timothy Sprinkle, MediaBridge.com
> 
> Execs at XM and Sirius caused quite a stir (in A/V circles) earlier this week when it was announced that, if the proposed merger of the two satellite radio providers goes through, the new company plans to offer service on an a la carte basis at subscription prices substantially lower than today's average.
> 
> And, as cable watchers know, nothing gets hearts beating in Washington like a little "a la carte" talk.
> 
> "Mel and I are very excited about being able to offer a la carte programming," said XM chairman Gary Parsons on behalf of his Sirius counterpart Karmazin at the announcement. "We think this is going to be great for consumers and great for our business. In our filing tomorrow with the FCC, we will offer detailed plans regarding how we will achieve those goals. These plans will further demonstrate why this merger is overwhelmingly good for consumers and in the public interest."
> 
> Obviously, the two companies are offering this a la carte carrot to placate Federal Trade Commission officials.
> 
> But, if it happens, what sort of effect will this have on actual customers?
> 
> Let's take a look at what's on the table.
> 
> The a la carte service is set to come in two flavors -- one offering 50 you-pick-'em channels, and another offering 100 channels. The 50-channel option, which will be available for either XM or Sirius programming but not a mix of the two, will cost $6.99 per month.
> 
> The 100-channel package will, aside from adding 50 more channels to the mix, allow customers to choose from "some of the best" XM and Sirius' programming for $14.99 per month. Additional channels can be added to each package for a modest fee.
> 
> And that's not all. If the merger happens, XM subscribers will be able to get certain Sirius programming on top of their regular programming for $16.99 (and vice versa for Sirius subscribers and "certain" XM programming). Discounted family versions of both services are also being offered.
> 
> In my view, this is good news for consumers. Not only will they be able to save money on their satellite radio bills, but with packages of 50 and 100 channels they won't have to give up much variety to do it. And the addition of XM/Sirius mix-and-match is a bonus, allowing listeners to cherry pick their favorites from both services.
> 
> Will this approach help sell more satellite radio subscriptions -- and, by extension, more satellite radios? We'll first have to wait and see if it becomes a reality, but I certainly wouldn't complain if it did.
> 
> What do you think about this plan? Good, bad or indifferent? Let me know and I'll post comments here next week.
> 
> [email protected]


www.TheRetailBridge.com  - used with permission


----------



## Nick

*"It is unlikely that the central programming of XM and Sirius will be
as reflective of the needs and interests of local neighborhoods..."*

SkyReport:


> The National Association of Neighborhoods (NAN) filed objections to the proposed merger of Sirius and XM this week, saying a unified company would harm diverse programming and small market radio stations. The grassroots group also said it would be consumers getting the short end of the stick if the companies are allowed to join forces.
> 
> NAN executive director Ricardo Byrd penned a letter to the Federal Communications Commission on behalf of the organization's 2,500 member groups from across the country. In it, Byrd expressed "serious concerns" about the availability of diverse radio programming if the deal were to go through and that a merger makes little sense for consumers.
> 
> "Local radio stations throughout the country are programmed by staff that live in the communities they serve, catering to the specific tastes and interests of their hometown neighborhoods," Byrd said. "It is unlikely that the central programming of XM and Sirius will be as reflective of the needs and interests of local neighborhoods as the programming broadcast by local radio stations."
> 
> The group also said that with a limited amount of satellite spectrum, a merged company would need to drop channels to make room for its most popular choices. "NAN is concerned that those channels catering to minorities and other niche markets would, most likely, be dropped," the letter said.
> 
> In related news, National Association of Broadcasters president and CEO David Rehr sent another letter to the FCC expressing the organization's opposition to the merger. Rehr said XM and Sirius' "hollow promises" would not protect consumers from a monopoly.


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## djlong

There ARE NO small market radio stations anymore. They've been all bought up. That's why niche and minority broadcasters seem to be coming out in favor of the merger - there's bandwidth there that they can get on as opposed to being kept out of local stations by voicetracking.


----------



## bigbenny13

The wholes is issue of a monopoly is absurd, as is NPR's first ammendment argument. Clearchannel and there ilk control nearly every radio station, billboard, and newspaper in America, look at the recent payola rulings by the FCC, they prove that all of the programming is done by a handfull of people for the entire country. This is almost identical to what happened when DTV and echostar tried to merge, the companies who already have the monoplies complained that there competition would be bceome one. It is laughable that the Time Warner merger happened in less time than is already taken.:rant: 

On a side note- if you are sick of these idiots destroying your freedoms than vote liberatarian


----------



## James Long

bigbenny13 said:


> On a side note- if you are sick of these idiots destroying your freedoms than vote liberatarian


Let's try not to get political here ... but if you want to spell, vote librarian!


----------



## Richard King

THEN vote Librarian.


----------



## paulman182

djlong said:


> There ARE NO small market radio stations anymore. They've been all bought up. That's why niche and minority broadcasters seem to be coming out in favor of the merger - there's bandwidth there that they can get on as opposed to being kept out of local stations by voicetracking.


Voicetracking in no way means a station is not local.

Some larger companies use out-of-market voice tracks, but even then, they air local news, weather, traffic, public service...

Out of the 30 small-market stations I can receive on my commute, NONE of them have owners based more than 75 miles from the station. Most owners are located within a few miles of their stations.

People have a tendency to extrapolate their local experience nationwide, and it is often just not applicable. Small market radio is alive, vital, and profitable.


----------



## Nick

SkyReport:


> The satellite radio merger of Sirius and XM has long been debated in Washington, on Wall Street and among the public. Now, the companies have filed with the Federal Communications Commission an economic analysis of the deal and some feel its the satcasters' best shot at shaping opinions in their favor.
> 
> The analysis addresses a few key issues that have been sources of contention for the Department of Justice, members of the FCC and the volumes of organizations that have filed comments with the government voicing opposition to the deal. According to some analysts, the filing represents the first time either XM or Sirius have offered a sophisticated economic analysis to support the idea that a unified satellite radio company would be in the public's best interest.
> 
> "The analysis points to, among other things, usage data and data correlating satellite radio penetration with terrestrial radio coverage, as evidence that consumers see other products as substitutes for satellite radio," Stifel Nicolaus' Blair Levin said. The analysis also suggests that taking into consideration the characteristics of the satellite radio business, "it would be irrational for the merged companies to raise prices."
> 
> Coupled with the companies' recent announcement that they would offer a la carte programming, Levin said the economic analysis "helps recapture momentum for the deal."
> 
> Still, the analyst said, based on the firm's review of the report, the merger "remains a close call" and it is "more likely than not that the deal is approved." Levin also said significant portions of the report was redacted - or classified - and opponents have yet to have a chance to offer their take on the data.


www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## Richard King

Chicago Tribune appears to favor merger on editorial page. Then again, they could just be favoring alacarte.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-0729edit2jul29,0,4774912.story
Do you want Oprah with that?


> To get the go-ahead to merge, Sirius and XM must convince the Justice Department that a marriage of the nation's only two satellite radio services won't reduce competition. They have to convince the Federal Communications Commission that the merger would benefit consumers.
> 
> The argument about competition should be settled: It is thriving. Satellite radio competes with free broadcast and Internet radio, digital radio, cable TV music channels, cell phones that download music and MP3 players. Competition in radio will thrive whether there are two satellite companies or just one.


More...


----------



## Dolly

Richard King said:


> Chicago Tribune appears to favor merger on editorial page. Then again, they could just be favoring alacarte.
> 
> http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-0729edit2jul29,0,4774912.story
> Do you want Oprah with that?
> More...


I like alacarte myself  In fact I wish Sat. TV would use it more. But I can't understand if XM/S can merge why couldn't D and E*?


----------



## Dolly

Another issue XM keeps telling me new Radios won't be required, but I keep reading they will be  I have XM in my car, if they merge what am I supposed to do?


----------



## James Long

Who you going to believe? The company or rumors?

XM wants your money ... I'm reasonably sure that their promises of "no new radios" will either be kept or they will have a plan for upgrading to the right radio. No need to panic ... not even a little bit!


----------



## Steve Mehs

Don’t worry about it. New radios will only be required if you want all of XM's and all of Sirius' content on the same receiver. Each service will broadcast 11 ‘Best of’ channels of the other service, at an additional cost. If you want anything besides those additional 11 channels, a new radio will be required, but if you’re happy with what you have now, no additional hardware will be required.


----------



## pez2002

Steve Mehs said:


> Don't worry about it. New radios will only be required if you want all of XM's and all of Sirius' content on the same receiver. Each service will broadcast 11 'Best of' channels of the other service, at an additional cost. If you want anything besides those additional 11 channels, a new radio will be required, but if you're happy with what you have now, no additional hardware will be required.


howard 100 can i just get that channel with the radio i have now ???
if the merger goes through

I dont like the sirius music stations the djs talk way too much i do like shade 45 though they have alot of good hip-hop shows on that channel hip-hop radio in philly sucks


----------



## Steve Mehs

You can't pick and choose which Sirius channels you'll get, XM will rebroadcast 11 of them, which 11 is anyones guess. It would be impossible to create custom Best Of packages for every subscriber, without having all channels of the other service on the system.


----------



## Dolly

Steve Mehs said:


> You can't pick and choose which Sirius channels you'll get, XM will rebroadcast 11 of them, which 11 is anyones guess. It would be impossible to create custom Best Of packages for every subscriber, without having all channels of the other service on the system.


I know they can't have packages for every subscriber, but XM is not telling me that depending or what I want (if the merger does happen) that I will indeed need new equipment. If I just had a home radio, it would be easy to get another radio--but in a car?


----------



## Dolly

James Long said:


> Who you going to believe? The company or rumors?
> 
> XM wants your money ... I'm reasonably sure that their promises of "no new radios" will either be kept or they will have a plan for upgrading to the right radio. No need to panic ... not even a little bit!


Believe me James I learned a long time ago to listen to the "rumors" carefully. And that is the point XM does want my money so they are being very selective (to put it as nicely as possible) in what they are telling me.


----------



## Dolly

Members of Congress are coming out against the merger. I have my fingers crossed that this is one merger that doesn't happen :angel:


----------



## ibooksrule

Why is everyone against this. The one thing we need is better satellite radio. I use to have XM then they ditched my station. So i went to Sirius then the station i switched for is no longer on. They keep claiming that its because of bandwith. Well with the merger they would have a whole lot of band with open. Since all the stations such as 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s music and others are basicly repeats of each other would only have 1 of each and for each of these stations that is a duplicate that would be bandwith they would be able to put some of these channels back. I miss the torch and revoultion. The torch was better. It was alot better before XM took it over and it was owned by another company. Revoultion played to much other music rather then just christian rock and metal. 
RadioU a great and one of the longest running positive rock and metal stations around. and they are commercial free. They have given thought to rebroadcasting over xm or sirius. I think that if they merge they would now have the bandwith to accomidate RadioU or other great stations. Sirius has to many dedicated stations. we have elvis, the stones, the who. These stations could be used for stations more people would like but nope they dump revolution and others in favor of stations like this. XM does the same. 

I am in favor of the merger so we have bandwith and more good channels we can listen to. plus no matter if you want a channel on xm or sirius or you like both you wont have to have 2 radios. You would just get 1 radio. 

Why is everyone so against this i cant find a reason why


----------



## harsh

ibooksrule said:


> Why is everyone so against this i cant find a reason why


Because the satellite radio providers aren't regulated, competition is needed to keep the prices reasonable and foster an environment where new products are popping up all the time. Without the motivation of competition, the value may go down and attractive new programming will not happen.


----------



## Steve Mehs

> Why is everyone against this. The one thing we need is better satellite radio.


Because your freeing up of bandwidth means limiting of my choices. I have both XM and Sirius and have had both for sometime now. As a dual subscriber, I'd be screwed. XM and Sirius have two different feels to them. Sometimes I'm in the mood for XM and sometimes I'm in the mood for Sirius. For example I like both Octane and Squizz, both are current hard rock stations, but have two very unique feels to them and I don't want to have my choices eliminated. And plus, if channels are eliminated, who says which goes and which stays. A lot of people prefer 60s Vibrations over 60s on 6, and visa-versa, I don't want some bean counter number cruncher telling me what I should listen to, I'll make that choice myself.

BTW - Rolling Stones Radio is gone, The Who channel is gone, Elvis Radio is a result of a Sirius/Graceland deal. I really don't mind having two radios, and I don't want my subscription price to be lowered. I'm happy paying $50/month for what I get. It's XM and Sirius competing with each other that have led them to be as great as they are and they need to continue to compete with each other, either that or have them merger, but the joined company gets only half the spectrum and allow another provider in the mix.

I am against the merger always have been always will, and I do not believe it will go though.


----------



## ibooksrule

I have been upset with XM since they ditched the TOrch. It needed improvement but then they just take it off. I understand what your saying now. maybe they should make a radio that allows you to have both in one. rather then merge. 
I love satellite radio but the reason i bought my XM 2 years ago was to listen to the Torch but 6 months later it was gone. I do like some of XM stations and i like some sirius. Its been quite some time since i listened to XM though so i dont know if its changed or how it is now days. Its been almost a year i believe.

I would love to see more programming more channels rather then a merger. but i felt the merger was the only way that would happen


----------



## djlong

The reason I'm against this is because this merger will NOT result in increased bandwidth. IT CAN'T - not for several years.

The scrambling systems for XM and Sirius are RADICALLY different. The radios CANNOT interoperate. This means that XM receivers will still only get XM channels and Sirius receivers will still only get Sirius channels.

Only brand new receivers could be made that would decrypt both schemes but what does that mean for the OVER 15 MILLION receivers out there?

If XM and Sirius receivers were compatible, then I'd be all for the merger. If they announced some sort of receiver swapout or discount program for new (as yet unnanounced) "XM/Sirius" receivers, I might be in favor of things.

Until then, this merger means NOTHING as far as any additional technical benefits.


----------



## cbeckner80

djlong said:


> If XM and Sirius receivers were compatible, then I'd be all for the merger. If they announced some sort of receiver swapout or discount program for new (as yet unnanounced) "XM/Sirius" receivers, I might be in favor of things.
> 
> Until then, this merger means NOTHING as far as any additional technical benefits.


Exactly. We are going to be the real loosers in this merger. It will cost us $$ in the long run, either increased subscription prices, or equipment cost.:nono2:


----------



## paulman182

cbeckner80 said:


> Exactly. We are going to be the real loosers in this merger. It will cost us $$ in the long run, either increased subscription prices, or equipment cost.:nono2:


As I understand it, without $$ from somewhere, either one or both services will be bye-bye.

New hardware will be necessay if one wants a la carte or to choose some of the channels from both services. Otherwise, they say our current equipment is OK.

Of course, there is nothing to keep the two services from simulcasting some of the similar channels, but that would mean even fewer choices than now...


----------



## moooog

paulman182 said:


> As I understand it, without $$ from somewhere, either one or both services will be bye-bye.
> 
> Wouldn't that create a monopoly by default? If say XM goes under, I hardly see why somebody else would want to rush in and purchase the remaining license - unless they are eager to lose money hand over fist like XM and Sirius. I think I paid 10 bucks for my XM Roady XT after agreeing to keep it active for 6 months, so It wouldn't bother me at all to purchase new hardware - being a Dish Network subscriber for 10 years has made me used to that.
> 
> I live in the country, and Satellite radio is the only option, and I would love to have the NBA, MLB, and NFL on one receiver for a nice neat install. I listen to XM in all my vehicles and implements using the XT and a Pioneer portable - and it's still a hassle to move the receivers around, and I'm uninterested in having to do that with receivers and antennaes from both XM and Sirius - so I only have XM. I'd gladly pay another 10 bucks a month for one universal antennae and one receiver - rather than having two receivers and two subscriptions and a mess of equipment and wires and the expense of all the accessories. I basicly only listen to XM 175 MLB, the baseball feeds, Deep Tracks, and America Right and Air America - so a-la-carte and one Satellite company would inevitably save me money - and my sports programming would triple overnight.
> 
> Lots of people who support this merger likely own stock in the companies, and lots of people who oppose it are likely those who always distrust the "big evil corporations". On a practical level, I support the merger big time as I want all the programming and I want it on one receiver. I supported the Directv Dish merger for the same reasons. What about guilty until proven innocent, why not allow the merger. If Sirius is stupid enough to try jacking up rates to 50 bucks a month, I'm sure there will be major outrage and a swat team of government lawyers will go after them just like they did Microsoft and AT&T.


----------



## Dolly

moooog said:


> paulman182 said:
> 
> 
> 
> As I understand it, without $$ from somewhere, either one or both services will be bye-bye.
> 
> Wouldn't that create a monopoly by default? If say XM goes under, I hardly see why somebody else would want to rush in and purchase the remaining license - unless they are eager to lose money hand over fist like XM and Sirius. I think I paid 10 bucks for my XM Roady XT after agreeing to keep it active for 6 months, so It wouldn't bother me at all to purchase new hardware - being a Dish Network subscriber for 10 years has made me used to that.
> 
> I live in the country, and Satellite radio is the only option, and I would love to have the NBA, MLB, and NFL on one receiver for a nice neat install. I listen to XM in all my vehicles and implements using the XT and a Pioneer portable - and it's still a hassle to move the receivers around, and I'm uninterested in having to do that with receivers and antennaes from both XM and Sirius - so I only have XM. I'd gladly pay another 10 bucks a month for one universal antennae and one receiver - rather than having two receivers and two subscriptions and a mess of equipment and wires and the expense of all the accessories. I basicly only listen to XM 175 MLB, the baseball feeds, Deep Tracks, and America Right and Air America - so a-la-carte and one Satellite company would inevitably save me money - and my sports programming would triple overnight.
> 
> Lots of people who support this merger likely own stock in the companies, and lots of people who oppose it are likely those who always distrust the "big evil corporations". On a practical level, I support the merger big time as I want all the programming and I want it on one receiver. I supported the Directv Dish merger for the same reasons. What about guilty until proven innocent, why not allow the merger. If Sirius is stupid enough to try jacking up rates to 50 bucks a month, I'm sure there will be major outrage and a swat team of government lawyers will go after them just like they did Microsoft and AT&T.
> 
> 
> 
> But the problem is right now there is no "one" receiver. New radios will have to be made to do the a la carte, if the merger is approved. If XM/Sirius need to merge to stay in business, may be there isn't really a big enough market for Sat. radio anyway? D and E* are doing well a part on the TV side of things. In fact one pushes the other one to do better-- come up with something different and/or something more. I like it that way
Click to expand...


----------



## moooog

Dolly said:


> moooog said:
> 
> 
> 
> But the problem is right now there is no "one" receiver. New radios will have to be made to do the a la carte, if the merger is approved. If XM/Sirius need to merge to stay in business, may be there isn't really a big enough market for Sat. radio anyway? D and E* are doing well a part on the TV side of things. In fact one pushes the other one to do better-- come up with something different and/or something more. I like it that way
> 
> 
> 
> Well, I think XM and Sirius have about 15 million subscribers between them, not as high as TV, but that's a significant number. I believe in competition to drive improvements also, but I would hope that driven folks like Charlie and Bill Gates etc. would continue to come up with ideas and improve their "babies" regardless. That's how they arrived where they are in the first place - frankly I'm amazed at the constant improvements that Dish keeps coming up with - basicly everything I've ever asked for in terms of their hardware is now in existence. I guess I have more faith in people than most though.
Click to expand...


----------



## Steve Mehs

> Lots of people who support this merger likely own stock in the companies, and lots of people who oppose it are likely those who always distrust the "big evil corporations".


I am in no way an anti corporate hippie. I typically support big business, I'm loyal as a the day is long to Microsoft, WalMart gets a good portion of my paycheck and I'll be damned if I fill my tank up with anything but Mobil gas but as a subscriber to both XM and Sirius I feel I have valid reasons for being against the merger. I was also against the Sprint/Nextel merger and I've already experienced the negatives from that.



> and it's still a hassle to move the receivers around, and I'm uninterested in having to do that with receivers and antennaes from both XM and Sirius - so I only have XM.


Going dual sub in a vehicle really isn't that much of a hassle. The initial install can be a little tricky figuring out placement and how to run wires but it makes for a nice Saturday project

XM Delphi Roady XT - $50
Sirius Starmate 4 - $70
Dual Input Auxiliary Adaptor - $80
138 commercial free music channels - PRICELESS

Going dual sub at home now is easy. Both Onkyo and Sony now offer both XM and Sirius tuners integrated into their home theater receivers.


----------



## moooog

Going dual sub at home now is easy. Both Onkyo and Sony now offer both XM and Sirius tuners integrated into their home theater receivers.[/QUOTE]

My new Denon 4308 is "XM Ready", but you still have to buy a little gadget called a XM Mini Tuner and a home dock, that looks like it plugs into a proprietary jack on the back of the receiver. I can't see how this is any better than plugging my Pioneer Inno into the audio jacks, other than a display on the GUI. Are other "XM Ready" receivers better than this? To me "Ready" should mean you get a subscription and plug in the antenna - do the ONkyo's and Sony's have built in Tuners? .


----------



## Steve Mehs

I should have said XM and Sirius Ready, yes you need either the Connect N Play antenna or the new Passport for XM and the Sirius equivalent. IMO, this is very cool and I'd rather have it like this then what you suggest. With the XM Passport system, the minituner gets activated not the receiver, so if you get another device, replace the receiver or whatever all you have to do is plug in the minituner and boom you’ve got XM, also you can swap it between multiple devices with only one subscription.

Also this provides better sound quality and if you have a Neural capable receiver, not only will you get the XMHD stations in 5.1, but you’ll also get better stereo separation. I have XM integrated in my Sony HT receiver, and I’d never go back to a plug and play receiver.


----------



## Nick

The pending merger of Sirius and XM appears to have received support in the form of a legal precedent resulting from a court decision in an entirely unrelated industry when a federal judge ruled last week against governmental attempts to block a proposed merger between two organic foods companies, Whole Foods and Wild Oats.

In a decision that rejected the government's claim that the organic foods industry merger would create an anti-competitive marketplace, the precedent established in the court's ruling is being viewed as potentially helpful to the satellite radio merger effort.

While it may seem like satellite radio and organic foods have nothing to do with one another, industry observers have noted that the two mergers have some very real similarities.

Analysts following the merger of Whole Foods and Wild Oats say that while organic foods is a specialized segment, it is still a part of the overall supermarket business. For example, traditional supermarket chains carry a growing selection of organic products on their shelves.

As such, satellite radio is also a part of the overall audio entertainment sector, with Sirius and XM indeed competing with traditional radio, mobile services, internet radio and iPods.

In theory, the Whole Foods decision could bolster positive sentiment on Wall Street and on Capitol Hill about the prospects of a Sirius/XM merger. Further, the decision could generate confidence within the companies that even if the government attempts to block the merger, XM and Sirius could find favorable treatment within the courts.

Adapted from SkyReports.com


----------



## Dolly

Nick said:


> The pending merger of Sirius and XM appears to have received support in the form of a legal precedent resulting from a court decision in an entirely unrelated industry when a federal judge ruled last week against governmental attempts to block a proposed merger between two organic foods companies, Whole Foods and Wild Oats.
> 
> In a decision that rejected the government's claim that the organic foods industry merger would create an anti-competitive marketplace, the precedent established in the court's ruling is being viewed as potentially helpful to the satellite radio merger effort.
> 
> While it may seem like satellite radio and organic foods have nothing to do with one another, industry observers have noted that the two mergers have some very real similarities.
> 
> Analysts following the merger of Whole Foods and Wild Oats say that while organic foods is a specialized segment, it is still a part of the overall supermarket business. For example, traditional supermarket chains carry a growing selection of organic products on their shelves.
> 
> As such, satellite radio is also a part of the overall audio entertainment sector, with Sirius and XM indeed competing with traditional radio, mobile services, internet radio and iPods.
> 
> In theory, the Whole Foods decision could bolster positive sentiment on Wall Street and on Capitol Hill about the prospects of a Sirius/XM merger. Further, the decision could generate confidence within the companies that even if the government attempts to block the merger, XM and Sirius could find favorable treatment within the courts.
> 
> Adapted from SkyReports.com


I don't like this type of news :raspberry Of course, thank you Nick for posting because we do need all the information about the merger  I just don't like what I'm reading


----------



## Nick

Dolly said:


> I don't like this type of news :raspberry Of course, thank you Nick for posting because we do need all the information about the merger  I just don't like what I'm reading


I'm just the messenger! :grin:


----------



## Dolly

Nick said:


> I'm just the messenger! :grin:


That's why I put the smile with the thanks for posting  I didn't want you to think the :raspberry was meant for you :lol:


----------



## guillermopelotas

Steve Mehs said:


> Because your freeing up of bandwidth means limiting of my choices. I have both XM and Sirius and have had both for sometime now. As a dual subscriber, I'd be screwed.
> 
> .... I'm happy paying $50/month for what I get. It's XM and Sirius competing with each other that have led them to be as great as they are and they need to continue to compete with each other, either that or have them merger, but the joined company gets only half the spectrum and allow another provider in the mix.


The willingness of the few to pay $50 for two services to get all the content and exclusives doesn't exactly fall in the category of consumer choice. It falls into the category of your personal convenience.

I can sympathize with not wanting to lose what you've got, since you can afford it, but the plans and prices offered look as if they are actually going to be good for consumers. Forcing choice between two existing entities in the same space is not actually letting the marketplace decide.

Lets not forget that there are other options (free radio, HD radio, and other subscription services that use different business models). If this combined XM/Sirius entity doesn't take care of those consumers, not only are people going to go elsewhere, but other companies are going to compete and beat them in their own space. THAT is where you get consumer choice.


----------



## Richard King

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/070905/nyw082.html?.v=101

Former FCC Chairman, Mark Fowler, Calls for Approval of Satellite Radio Merger


> WASHINGTON and NEW YORK, Sept. 5 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- XM Satellite Radio (Nasdaq: XMSR - News) and SIRIUS Satellite Radio (Nasdaq: SIRI - News) today announced the support of Former FCC Chairman, Mark Fowler, for their pending merger.
> "We are extremely pleased to receive support from one of the most highly regarded thought leaders in the communications industry," said Gary Parsons, Chairman of XM, and Mel Karmazin, CEO of SIRIUS, in a joint statement. "As the longest serving Chairman of the FCC in our nation's history, Mr. Fowler has had a lasting impact on global communications. His backing of this merger further illustrates the benefits a combined SIRIUS and XM will bring to audio entertainment consumers."


More..


----------



## Dolly

I asked a person with a legal anti-trust/communications background about the merger. The person felt the merger would be done  :crying:


----------



## pez2002

we will know in 60 days if this thing passes thats what all-access is saying


----------



## Dolly

pez2002 said:


> we will know in 60 days if this thing passes thats what all-access is saying


60 days :eek2: What is "all-access"


----------



## Steve Mehs

> The willingness of the few to pay $50 for two services to get all the content and exclusives doesn't exactly fall in the category of consumer choice. It falls into the category of your personal convenience.


But I pay $50 a month for three XM subscriptions, two Sirius subscriptions and Sirius Internet Radio Premium. Full subscription to either service is staying the same price, subscriptions to both services are staying the same price. The amount of people that will be saving money on this will not be that great, how many of the current 14+ million subscribers out there are even willing to shell out cash for a new interoperable receiver just to get a Sirius or XM channel that they might like and maybe save three cents monthly?



> Lets not forget that there are other options (free radio, HD radio, and other subscription services that use different business models).


They are options, but that doesn't mean they're good ones. I'll never go back to commercial filled terrestrial radio, analog or digital, I have an iPod but I can' discover new content on that, and I have Music Choice on digital cable, but I can't exactly take that with me.

XM and Sirius have given me everything I ever wanted and much more when it comes to audio entertainment. It's the competition between the two that keeps then great. Like I said before, want to see what satellite radio would be like without competition? Worldspace.com


----------



## pez2002

we will know in 30 days http://www.siriusbackstage.com/2007/09/06/merger-decision-expected-within-30-days/


----------



## Dolly

pez2002 said:


> we will know in 30 days http://www.siriusbackstage.com/2007/09/06/merger-decision-expected-within-30-days/


Thanks for the link  Apparently it won't be 100% finished in 30 days, but it does sound like the merger will be approved  :crying:


----------



## Richard King

Sirius Soars on Deal Chatter

.....


> Shares in the companies rose more than 6% after analysts at Cowen & Co. said they expect the deal to close next month....
> 
> In a note to clients Wednesday, Cowen analyst Tom Watts writes that the outlook on the merger is the "best ever." Watts goes on to predict that the deal gets approved next month.


More.

We shall see.


----------



## Dolly

Richard King said:


> Sirius Soars on Deal Chatter
> 
> .....More.
> 
> We shall see.


:crying:


----------



## ld323

How much longer will it be till mobile internet radio is ubiquitous in cars? I assume that's the final frontier... I assume this will have to be delivered by the cell phone companies since Wi-Fi or Wimax is more of a stationary medium.......?


----------



## Richard King

Funny you should mention that:

http://www.skyreport.com/#article4



> Study: WiMAX Could Affect Satellite Radio
> The potential for mobile WiMAX services to succeed is difficult to argue against. And, if consumers adopt the technology like many are predicting, satellite radio could be headed for battle against yet another competitor.


More....


----------



## ai4i

My main delight is that I will not mount two recievers in my cab but have always wanted some of the channels of each service. Merger or not, I am eager for *these guys* quest to become a reality.


----------



## Dolly

ai4i said:


> My main delight is that I will not mount two recievers in my cab but have always wanted some of the channels of each service. Merger or not, I am eager for *these guys* quest to become a reality.


And I wonder what the price will be for that :money:


----------



## paulman182

ai4i said:


> My main delight is that I will not mount two recievers in my cab but have always wanted some of the channels of each service. Merger or not, I am eager for *these guys* quest to become a reality.


Evidently this is the project that FCC required Sirius and XM to undertake before approving the service. Last I saw, FCC was asking why nothing has come of it.

The answer is, because Sirius and XM don't want anything to come of it.


----------



## Dolly

paulman182 said:


> Evidently this is the project that FCC required Sirius and XM to undertake before approving the service. Last I saw, FCC was asking why nothing has come of it.
> 
> The answer is, because Sirius and XM don't want anything to come of it.


Since I don't back the merger I don't want anything to come of it either


----------



## ai4i

Dolly said:


> Since I don't back the merger I don't want anything to come of it either


Not necessarily the same thing.
We could have *interoperable* recievers even without a merger.


----------



## Dolly

ai4i said:


> Not necessarily the same thing.
> We could have *interoperable* recievers even without a merger.


But I think if there were interoperable receivers that would make the merger idea that much easier to put in place. This is just IMO, of course.


----------



## Richard King

http://www.thebridgemediagroup.com/morningbridge/#article4


> "We believe the merger will not obtain necessary regulatory approval,


More...


----------



## Dolly

Richard King said:


> http://www.thebridgemediagroup.com/morningbridge/#article4
> More...


This thing just keep swinging--yes, no, yes, no, etc. Reminds me of an old song by Sonny and Cher--And The Beat Goes On :beatdeadhorse:


----------



## ai4i

Dolly said:


> This thing just keep swinging--yes, no, yes, no, etc. Reminds me of an old song by Sonny and Cher--And The Beat Goes On :beatdeadhorse:


A definite
:goodjob:
*Maybe!*


----------



## fikuserectus

harsh said:


> Because the satellite radio providers aren't regulated, competition is needed to keep the prices reasonable and foster an environment where new products are popping up all the time. Without the motivation of competition, the value may go down and attractive new programming will not happen.


Satellite radio competes with free radio. If the merger goes through, free NAB radio will have over 300 million listeners while satellite will have about 14 million. Isn't that competition? The NAB seems to think so since they are spending millions to stop this merger.


----------



## Steve Mehs

> Isn't that competition?


Nope. Competition between XM and Sirius is what keeps the industry strong and what made XM and Sirius as great as they are today. Terrestrial radio (and the iPod) is no more competition to satellite radio then OTA TV is competition for satellite TV (and DVDs).


----------



## ai4i

Now we can argue about which delivery vehicles are competing with which others.


Steve Mehs said:


> ...is no more competition...then OTA TV is competition for satellite TV...


You mean they are not
I would say that all the "Happening in Hollywood" shows are competing with E!, All the Discovery Nets channels and the National Geographics channel are competing with PBS, and all the twenty four hour news nets are competing with network newscasts.


----------



## Steve Mehs

And I could say that since network programming typically premiers in the fall, and cable series usually are summer series OTA TV and cable channels do not directly compete for the same eyeballs during the same time of the year.

The idea that satellite radio directly competes with terrestrial radio is idiotic. I could stare out the window and listen to the rain drops hitting my roof for audio entertainment. So I guess sounds of nature is competition of satellite radio now. 

I have watched this industry grow, if there were only XM or only Sirius, satellite radio would totally suck. Competition between the two helps create this little thing called innovation, something terrestrial radio does not have.


----------



## Richard King

> The idea that satellite radio directly competes with terrestrial radio is idiotic.


How many times do you tune into terrestrial radio during the week? I rarely if ever do, but only since installing satellite radio. If you had been a listener to terrestrial (as I was) and you are no longer (as I am no longer), you are living proof that they directly compete with eachother. The idea that they don't directly compete is "idiotic". While the satellite radio companies DO compete between eachother, they also compete with terrestrial.


----------



## Steve Mehs

I haven't listened to terrestrial in 3 or 4 years now. Terrestrial radio stations compete directly with each other. In a market you may have a Hot AC station that's owned by Entercomm and another Hot AC station owned by Clear Channel, those two stations are in direct competition with each other. They are not in direct competition with Hitlist on XM or Sirius Hits One on Sirius. Two different industries as a whole are in competition with each other, not individual parts of the industries.


----------



## Dolly

Richard King said:


> How many times do you tune into terrestrial radio during the week? I rarely if ever do, but only since installing satellite radio. If you had been a listener to terrestrial (as I was) and you are no longer (as I am no longer), you are living proof that they directly compete with eachother. The idea that they don't directly compete is "idiotic". While the satellite radio companies DO compete between eachother, they also compete with terrestrial.


I always thought terrestrial radio was great until I got an automobile with XM radio. Now XM is all I listen to  Just like when I came to the Forum I didn't understand what the big deal with HD was about. Now I love HD :sunsmile:


----------



## Richard King

Dolly said:


> I always thought terrestrial radio was great until I got an automobile with XM radio. Now XM is all I listen to  Just like when I came to the Forum I didn't understand what the big deal with HD was about. Now I love HD :sunsmile:


So, you would agree that XM and/or Sirius is competition to Terrestrial radio? I think it is, but, here's someone who agrees with Steve... but then they are paid to agree with Steve 

http://www.skyreport.com/#article3


> ..... According to The Carmel Group's latest study opposing the merger of Sirius and XM, examining the companies' posturing throughout the years shows that direct competition exists between the two satellite radio operators, and that "a true lack of competition" exists between the two players and the rest of the radio marketplace.....


More.


----------



## Nick

Perhaps of greater concern to avid sat radio fans, the same study also says...

_"...if the government approves a unified satellite radio entity, competition
and innovation, among other things, will suffer."_


----------



## Richard King

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/sto...0-41B8-B394-EEA4BBC7D5B8}&dist=TQP_Mod_pressN
More Members of Congress Voice Support for the SIRIUS/XM Merger


> WASHINGTON and NEW YORK, Oct 29, 2007 /PRNewswire-USNewswire via COMTEX/ -- Diverse Group of Representatives See Merger as Strengthening Program Diversity In a letter sent to Federal Communications Commission Chairman Kevin Martin, eleven Members of Congress voiced their support for the merger of SIRIUS Satellite Radio (SIRI) and XM Satellite Radio (XMSR). Their letter further underscores the two companies' commitment to enhancing diverse programming and the benefits a merger will bring to minority consumers. The letter was signed by: Rep. Sanford Bishop (D-GA), Rep. Corrine Brown (D-FL), Rep. Yvette Clarke (D-NY), Rep. Danny Davis (D-IL), Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY), Rep. Ralph Hall (R-TX), Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-FL), Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), Rep. Greg Meeks (D-NY), Rep. Bobby Rush (D-IL), and Rep. Edolphus Towns (D-NY). In their letter to Chairman Martin, the lawmakers identified a "plethora of choices" in the audio entertainment market that compete with satellite radio, adding that enabling the two companies to merge will enhance "innovative and diverse content, jobs and business partnering opportunities."


More....


----------



## mhayes70

I think XM and/or Sirius are in competition with Terrestrial radio. How can you say the are not? Why is Terrestrial radio trying everything in there power to keep people from getting Satellite radio? I think it is a very good idea for XM and Sirius to merge.


----------



## Nick

Fact is, virtually all media is in competition with each other -- television, terrestrial
and sat radio, movies, music, websites, billboards, newspapers, magazines, even
junk mail. All these are competing for our eyes and ears, and, ultimately, our wallets.


----------



## Steve Mehs

> More Members of Congress Voice Support for the SIRIUS/XM Merger


I'd like to know how many member of congress, members of all these groups that have come out of the woodwork in favor of the merger actually have either satellite radio service, or better yet, both. My guess would be not very many to absolutely none.



> Perhaps of greater concern to avid sat radio fans, the same study also says...
> 
> "...if the government approves a unified satellite radio entity, competition
> and innovation, among other things, will suffer."


That be it. Anyone who can honestly say the additions of niche formats, the diversity, the hardware features, etc were as a result of some so called competition with terrestrial radio is lying to themselves.

Why anyone is for this merger baffles me. In the past few years I've seen HP and Compaq merge, resulting in things not to my liking, and I've seen Sprint and Nextel merge again, nothing remotely positive here. Merger of equals, my ass. One of the two merged entities will overpower the other resulting in nothing but a larger XM or Sirius, with no intraindustry competition.

Again, I invite the sheelpe who believe in the merger to take a look at what satellite radio would be like with one provider. Check out the hardware and programming available from WorldSpace and then be thankful we have two providers to chose from whose COMPETITION with EACH OTHER has lead to INNOVATION that we all enjoy today. Or spend a few months in Asia with WorldSpace then tell me how great having one satellite provider is.


----------



## Dolly

Nick said:


> Fact is, virtually all media is in competition with each other -- television, terrestrial
> and sat radio, movies, music, websites, billboards, newspapers, magazines, even
> junk mail. All these are competing for our eyes and ears, and, ultimately, our wallets.


Especially our wallets  My Congress is changing its' tune. Last time I read anything about Congress and the Merger most were against it  I am against the merger myself, but I have to honestly say since I got XM in my automobile I no longer listen to terrestrial radio.


----------



## ai4i

Steve Mehs said:


> ...spend a few months in Asia with WorldSpace then tell me how great having one satellite provider is.


A clearer crystal ball to gaze into would be the one labeled *MobaHO!*
This Japanese / Korean service enjoys the amount of bandwidth that a combined XiriuM service would have and they are getting it right.
Noah Samara's dream - Worldspace - caters to a diverse, multilingual, mostly third world market and does what they do pretty well. Originally, they were a free service.
Soon, Europe will enjoy a single satrad service from one of several applicants for the license. Admittedly, I prefer the Spanish company, *Ondas.*


----------



## Steve Mehs

I'm not too impressed by MobaHO. Last I knew the service only offered about 30 music stations, mostly generic stuff.


----------



## Richard King

http://www.skyreport.com/#article4
Support Mounts for Satellite Radio Merger


> When a Wall Street analyst reported last week that the assistant attorney general for the Department of Justice would approve the proposed merger of Sirius and XM, stocks for both companies saw a healthy boost. Now the satcasters are taking advantage of the momentum by touting more lawmakers, organizations and high-profile personalities that have come forward in support of a unified satellite radio field.


More...


----------



## Dolly

I hate to say it, but I think the merger is going to take place :raspberry


----------



## ai4i

Dolly said:


> I hate to say it, but... :raspberry


We are concerned for your implied feeling of distress and also your blood pressure. No one on this or any other board that I know of would ever want you to say or do anything that you would hate to say or do.


----------



## Richard King

http://custom.marketwatch.com/custom/tdameritrade-com/html-story.asp?guid={E962890F-EED9-4983-992B-6FECD150BE8B}
Former FCC Chairman Hundt Comments on Sirius-XM Merger in Interview


> WASHINGTON and NEW YORK, Nov 13, 2007 /PRNewswire-FirstCall via COMTEX/ -- XM Satellite Radio (XMSR) and SIRIUS Satellite Radio (SIRI) announced today that, as part of an interview, former FCC Chairman Reed Hundt voiced support for the merger of SIRIUS and XM. A copy of the unedited transcript of the interview was filed today with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Mr. Hundt served as Chairman of the FCC from 1993 through 1997. During his tenure, the Commission formulated rules for satellite radio and granted SIRIUS and XM their licenses, a process in which Mr. Hundt was integrally involved.


More


----------



## Richard King

http://custom.marketwatch.com/custom/tdameritrade-com/html-story.asp?guid={BE8E1BE0-02DB-492F-BC42-8194BF34F866}
XM Shareholders Vote to Approve Agreement with Sirius (amazing)


> WASHINGTON, Nov 13, 2007 /PRNewswire-FirstCall via COMTEX/ -- XM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc. (XMSR) reported at the conclusion of its special meeting of stockholders today that its stockholders have voted to approve the previously announced merger with Sirius Satellite Radio Inc. (SIRI). The preliminary tabulation indicates that 99.8 percent of the shares voted were cast in favor of the transaction. "Today's vote is the latest demonstration of the strong support for our merger from a wide range of individuals and prestigious organizations who recognize the benefits that a merger will bring to consumers," said Gary Parsons, Chairman of the Board, XM Satellite Radio. "We are proud to have received support for our merger from organizations representing African Americans, women, rural Americans and Hispanics, as well as from former FCC Chairmen and Commissioners and a diverse group of elected officials. We appreciate our shareholders' overwhelming support."


More....


----------



## Steve Mehs

It's a very sad day for the 14+ million satellite radio subscribers across America.


----------



## Richard King

Not yet. It still has to get gov't. approval. Everyone knew the shareholders would vote for it. XM shareholders voted 99.8% in favor.


----------



## Steve Mehs

It looks like the DOJ will approve, and the FCC has never done anything right by me so it will get the green light and yet again I get to watch companies I love be destroyed. I guess I should start listing to XM and Sirius as much as possible before changes happen. If I don't like what becomes of this, which I'm sure I won't, I'm walking away. Such a shame from an industry that showed so much promise after given no chance.


----------



## ai4i

Steve Mehs said:


> It's a very sad day for the 14+ million satellite radio subscribers across America.


At least for that fifth of a percent who don't want it!


----------



## Steve Mehs

Uh, the vote was a shareholders vote, not a subscriber vote.


----------



## ai4i

Steve Mehs said:


> Uh, the vote was a shareholders vote, not a subscriber vote.


Oops! I searched all throughout the smilies for this forum but I could not find the one with the dunce cap.


----------



## jmurray

Steve Mehs said:


> Because your freeing up of bandwidth means limiting of my choices. I have both XM and Sirius and have had both for sometime now. As a dual subscriber, I'd be screwed. XM and Sirius have two different feels to them. Sometimes I'm in the mood for XM and sometimes I'm in the mood for Sirius. For example I like both Octane and Squizz, both are current hard rock stations, but have two very unique feels to them and I don't want to have my choices eliminated. And plus, if channels are eliminated, who says which goes and which stays. A lot of people prefer 60s Vibrations over 60s on 6, and visa-versa, I don't want some bean counter number cruncher telling me what I should listen to, I'll make that choice myself.
> 
> I am against the merger always have been always will, and I do not believe it will go though.


Like you, I'm a big fan of Squizz on XM. I will become a sirius subscriber when my new car arrives and I will be a listener of Octane. The thing I want more than anything is sound quality to improve. This is not a guarantee with a merger, but it is a lot more likely than with two independent companies cramming channels into a more limited bandwidth. I hope they keep Squizz though...


----------



## mhayes70

I am all for the merger. Since XM is built into my car. I am missing Howard Stern and other channels I liked on Sirius.


----------



## Dolly

mhayes70 said:


> I am all for the merger. Since XM is built into my car. I am missing Howard Stern and other channels I liked on Sirius.


So you will still be missing them after the merger until a new car radio is developed that will allow you to hear everything


----------



## ibooksrule

why not just buy a sirius radio and stick it on your dash? you dont have to use it just because its in your car.


----------



## harsh

Dolly said:


> So you will still be missing them after the merger until a new car radio is developed that will allow you to hear everything


This is more likely to happen with the merged duo than it is by FCC decree.


----------



## Richard King

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/sto...77-43BC-82BF-D9A5C518A5A4}&dist=TQP_Mod_mktwN
Bear Stearns: DOJ OK for Sirius, XM coming soon


> CHICAGO (MarketWatch) -- Shares of Sirius Satellite Radio and XM Satellite Radio advanced after Bear Stearns told clients that Sirius' $13.6 billion acquisition of XM could be approved by Department of Justice officials as soon as Friday.


More....


----------



## wheato22

Steve Mehs said:


> It's a very sad day for the 14+ million satellite radio subscribers across America.


Why do you think 14+ million will have a sad day Steve? Assuming the XM satellite network survives, only Sirius subscribers will be unhappy over the long run.

Or is Sirius's low earth strategy the long range plan?

I subscribe to both and continually have problems with signal dropout when driving with Sirius in wooded areas.


----------



## harsh

wheato22 said:


> Assuming the XM satellite network survives, only Sirius subscribers will be unhappy over the long run.


In a scenario where Sirius has acquired XM, how can XM outlast Sirius?


----------



## Steve Mehs

wheato22 said:


> Why do you think 14+ million will have a sad day Steve? Assuming the XM satellite network survives, only Sirius subscribers will be unhappy over the long run.


What difference does if you have XM, Sirius or both. The lack of innovation affects all of the subscribers in the industry. I also have both XM (4 years,3 subscriptions) and Sirius (3 years, 2 Subscriptions) and I absolutely love both services how they are now.


----------



## Richard King

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/sto...CE-48D1-8505-E369C901D645}&dist=TQP_Mod_mktwN
Sirius CFO: Still sees close of XM deal by end of year


----------



## Richard King

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/071212/xm_sirius_antitrust.html?.v=2
Lawmakers Warn on XM-Sirius Review


> WASHINGTON (AP) -- A key member of Congress has expressed concern in a letter to Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey that the Justice Department may "rush through" an approval of Sirius Satellite Radio Inc.'s $5 billion purchase of its rival XM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc.


More.....


----------



## Richard King

http://custom.marketwatch.com/custom/tdameritrade-com/html-story.asp?guid={2A00902A-BD5A-46E2-AD37-D4EB5A0625AC}
SIRIUS and XM Announce Additional Support for Merger


> WASHINGTON and NEW YORK, Dec 13, 2007 /PRNewswire-FirstCall via COMTEX/ -- Three additional Members of Congress joined General Motors Corporation, Club for Growth, Harpo Productions, the Rural Coalition, and celebrity talent Andres Cantor, Bill Mack, Wynton Marsalis, Cal Ripken Jr. and Barry Switzer as the latest supporters of the pending merger of XM Satellite Radio (XMSR) and SIRIUS Satellite Radio (SIRI). The latest bi-partisan Congressional supporters include the Chairman of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, Rep. Joe Baca (D-CA), Rep. Bob Filner (D-CA) and Rep. Connie Mack (R-FL). This new support adds to the diverse list of supporters for the pending merger.


More....


----------



## Nick

> ...Andres Cantor, Bill Mack, Wynton Marsalis, Cal Ripken Jr. and Barry Switzer as the latest supporters of the pending merger of XM Satellite Radio (XMSR) and SIRIUS Satellite Radio (SIRI). The latest bi-partisan Congressional supporters include the Chairman of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, Rep. Joe Baca (D-CA), Rep. Bob Filner (D-CA) and Rep. Connie Mack (R-FL).


Well, there you have it. If all these individuals support the merger
and 4 out of 5 dentists agree, then it's practually a done deal!


----------



## djlong

"Rush through" an approval? THis was announced in FEBRUARY and it's now DECEMBER!


----------



## harsh

djlong said:


> "Rush through" an approval? THis was announced in FEBRUARY and it's now DECEMBER!


Liberty Media has been trying to take a controlling interest in DIRECTV for over two years. It isn't surprising that a merger would take a year or more; especially when you throw in another regulatory agency into the mix.


----------



## rutgersfan

do our government politicians have nothing better to do than debate the merger of two satellite radio companies? this is so ridiculous. most of them are either getting paid by the nab to fight it, or they are some religious nuts who think the government has to parent my kids for me. howard stern is dirty, so no one should be able to listen to him. yeah, freedom of choice. i digress boys...


----------



## Richard King

http://www.skyreport.com/#article4

iBiquity Takes On Satellite Radio Merger


> Should a combined satellite radio entity be required to include technology from a competing service in its receivers?
> 
> Last month, iBiquity Digital, known for its HD Radio platform that allows FM and AM stations to deliver digital-quality audio to listeners, asked the Federal Communications Commission to consider a condition for the XM/Sirius merger that would require HD Radio technology to be included in all satellite radio receivers.


I guess this is proof that you don't get anything if you don't try. :lol:


----------



## Steve Mehs

Wow, that right there shows how big of a failure HD Radio is. The company that pretty much founded it doesn't even believe in it anymore.


----------



## James Long

I don't read it that way ... iBiquity is trying to force satellite digital services to provide free radios for their terrestrial digital services. Perhaps it is a sign that radio sales are not where they want to be but it is a savvy move.

If granted I hope the government requires all iBiquity radios to include Sirius/XM tuners.


----------



## Steve Mehs

I don't. I don't want any future satellite radio receiver I purchase being included in an HD Radio sales figure.


----------



## Ray_Clum

Steve Mehs said:


> I don't. I don't want any future satellite radio receiver I purchase being included in an HD Radio sales figure.


Steve, I think you've got James comment backwards. He said that *IF* the gubmint grants iBiquity's request that XM/Sirius receivers must also be HD Radio receivers *THEN* he wants iBiquity radios to double as XM/Sirius receivers.


----------



## BudShark

I didn't much care either way (typical American disinterest until it affects you) - but I had Sirius in a rental car for a month and my wife bought me XM for Christmas.

IMO, XM is great. I love the lack of DJs, channel selection, and my XPressRC. I am now not certain I want the proposal to go through - too many questions about hardware and which platform will be the standard going forward (Sirius' DJ focused or XMs content focused).

I am curious why its gotten so quiet lately though... guess it didn't make it before the holidays and everything got quiet for a month or so...

Chris


----------



## harsh

Steve Mehs said:


> Wow, that right there shows how big of a failure HD Radio is. The company that pretty much founded it doesn't even believe in it anymore.


I think this was a result of the dialog that surrounded the FCC tinkering with the idea that the SAR providers needed to offer a single receiver platform that would work with both services. Hybrid Digital radio is just trying to piggyback on that same thinking.


----------



## machavez00

http://xmradio.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=press_releases&item=1575


> SIRIUS and XM Extend Merger Agreement
> 
> WASHINGTON and NEW YORK, Feb 29, 2008 -- XM Satellite Radio (Nasdaq: XMSR) and SIRIUS Satellite Radio (Nasdaq: SIRI) today announced that the companies have agreed not to exercise their rights to terminate the Merger Agreement until May 1, 2008.
> 
> The closing of the pending merger remains subject to satisfaction of all applicable conditions, including approval from the Department of Justice and the Federal Communications Commission. For more information on the SIRIUS-XM merger, please visit www.XMmerger.com or www.SIRIUSmerger.com.


----------



## Earl Bonovich

Now that the Merger has been approved...

Continue the discussion...

Here...
http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=123710


----------



## Richard King

http://blogs.wsj.com/deals/2008/05/08/xm-sirius-still-no-end-in-sight/?mod=WSJBlog
XM-Sirius: Still No End in Sight


> Federal Communications Commission chairman Kevin Martin remained mum Thursday, when asked by reporters at a news conference about when he might begin circulating an item on the 334-days-and-counting merger of XM Satellite Radio and Sirius Satellite Radio.
> 
> Real work on crafting a compromise for conditions on the deal won't begin in earnest until Martin's staff produces a draft order and circulates it among the other four FCC commissioners. Even then, it will take at least three weeks for the FCC to come to some kind of agreement, if previous transactions are any indication.


More... too much more....


----------



## Richard King

The idiots are trying to justify their existence:

http://custom.marketwatch.com/custom/tdameritrade-com/html-story.asp?guid={e28fe120-e4a0-46c5-8070-b6a0e5b84511}



> Two senators are asking the Federal Communications Commission to require XM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc. (XMSR) and Sirius Satellite Radio Inc. (SIRI) to divest up to half of their combined radio spectrum as a condition of their proposed merger.
> 
> Sens. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., and Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, on Wednesday sent a letter to Federal Communications Chairman Kevin Martin saying the merged entity would hold more radio spectrum "than all terrestrial FM and AM spectrum combined."


----------



## Richard King

http://www.thestreet.com/s/xm-siriu...sanalysis/hardware/10418307.html?puc=_htmlbtb
*XM-Sirius Success Hinges on Concessions*


> ...Among those lobbying the FCC for certain impositions, private-equity firm Georgetown Partners has offered support for the XM-Sirius merger on the condition the FCC *hand over to them 20%* of the combined company's spectrum....
> 
> Also looking to get in on the action is American Public Media, a producer of public radio content. CEO William Kling has asked the FCC to *set aside 20%* of the combined parties' spectrum for noncommercial educational use....
> 
> The National Hispanic Media Coalition is another advocacy group looking for a chunk of XM-Sirius spectrum if the deal is approved. The NHMC, in a letter to the FCC, asked the commission to *set aside 15%* of the spectrum for minority and women-owned programmers who are unaffiliated in all respects with XM-Sirius.....
> 
> Similarly, iBiquity Digital is hoping the FCC will force XM and Sirius to open up their receivers to other satellite broadcasters and developers.


20% +20% + 15% = 55%. Of course, this will have to be on top of the 50% that the illustrious Senators :barf: insisted that they give up a few days ago. So, for this to go through all they have to do is give up 105% of their total bandwidth. Sure, that's the solution!!!


----------

