# XM/Sirus: DOJ approves merger



## mhking

CNN is just announcing now the approval of the XM-Sirius merger deal. Details forthcoming....


----------



## DCSholtis

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8VJVPPG2&show_article=1


----------



## Earl Bonovich

Merged Threads


----------



## Richard King

http://custom.marketwatch.com/custom/tdameritrade-com/html-story.asp?guid={de714e98-5152-4d51-aaa3-855e9331437c}


----------



## DCSholtis

Personally I'm glad to see this. Now we can get down to the business of providing me a solution for an XM/Sirius combo radio.

Come on FCC. Now do your job!


----------



## mhayes70

That is great news!!


----------



## argonaut

Wow look at the stock go!

http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=SIRI

and

http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=XMSR


----------



## Sixto

Fabulous news. Now baseball and football on the same radio! yahoo!


----------



## mhking

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The U.S. Justice Department approved the merger between satellite radio companies Sirius and XM Monday, more than a year after the two companies first announced their deal.

In its decision, the Department of Justice had to determine whether an XM-Sirius merger was anti-competitive, or if other media companies such as Clear Channel (CCU, Fortune 500), CBS (CBS, Fortune 500), or even Apple (AAPL, Fortune 500) with its iTunes software and iPod music player served as alternate options for music and media customers.

The Federal Communications Commission must also approve the deal before it can officially be completed. The FCC has yet to make a decision on the deal.

The merger would combine the nation's only two satellite radio companies and create a company with about 14 million subscribers. It would bring together Sirius' most well-known content, including Howard Stern and National Football League games with XM's Major League Baseball as well programming from Oprah Winfrey.

Shares of XM (XMSR) and Sirius (SIRI) both rose after the announcement.


----------



## unr1

wonderful news

I'm excited


----------



## wilbur_the_goose

Why is it wonderful?

As an XM'er, I'm not so sure.


----------



## mhking

The DOJ news release:

DoJ approves merger

http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2008/March/08_at_226.html

Statement of the Department of Justice Antitrust Division on its Decision
to Close its Investigation of XM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc.'s Merger
with Sirius Satellite Radio Inc.
Evidence Does Not Establish that Combination of
Satellite Radio Providers Would Substantially Reduce Competition
WASHINGTON - The Department of Justice's Antitrust Division issued the following statement today after announcing the closing of its investigation into the proposed merger of XM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc. with Sirius Satellite Radio Inc.:

"After a careful and thorough review of the proposed transaction, the Division concluded that the evidence does not demonstrate that the proposed merger of XM and Sirius is likely to substantially lessen competition, and that the transaction therefore is not likely to harm consumers. The Division reached this conclusion because the evidence did not show that the merger would enable the parties to profitably increase prices to satellite radio customers for several reasons, including: a lack of competition between the parties in important segments even without the merger; the competitive alternative services available to consumers; technological change that is expected to make those alternatives increasingly attractive over time; and efficiencies likely to flow from the transaction that could benefit consumers.

"The Division's investigation indicated that the parties are not likely to compete with respect to many segments of the satellite radio business even in the absence of the merger. Because customers must acquire equipment that is specialized to the satellite radio service to which they subscribe, and which cannot receive the other provider's signal, there has never been significant competition for customers who have already subscribed to one or the other service. For potential new subscribers, past competition has resulted in XM and Sirius entering long-term, sole-source contracts that provide incentives to all of the major auto manufacturers to install their radios in new vehicles. The car manufacturer channel accounts for a large and growing share of all satellite radio sales; yet, as a result of these contracts, there is not likely to be significant further competition between the parties for satellite radio equipment and service sold through this channel for many years. In the retail channel, where the parties likely would continue to compete to attract new subscribers absent the merger, the Division found that the evidence did not support defining a market limited to the two satellite radio firms that would exclude various alternative sources for audio entertainment, and similarly did not establish that the combined firm could profitably sustain an increased price to satellite radio consumers. Substantial cost savings likely to flow from the transaction also undermined any inference of competitive harm. Finally, the likely evolution of technology in the future, including the expected introduction in the next several years of mobile broadband Internet devices, made it even more unlikely that the transaction would harm consumers in the longer term. Accordingly, the Division has closed its investigation of the proposed merger."

ANALYSIS

During the course of its investigation, the Division reviewed millions of pages of documents, analyzed large amounts of data related to sales of satellite radios and subscriptions for satellite radio service, and interviewed scores of industry participants.

Extent of Likely Future Competition between XM and Sirius

The Division's analysis considered the extent to which the two satellite radio providers compete with one another. Although the firms in the past competed to attract new subscribers, there has never been significant competition between them for customers who have already subscribed to one or the other service and purchased the requisite equipment. Also, competition for new subscribers is likely to be substantially more limited in the future than it was in the past.

As to existing subscribers, the Division found that satellite radio equipment sold by each company is customized to each network and will not function with the other service. XM and Sirius made some efforts to develop an interoperable radio capable of receiving both sets of satellite signals. Depending on how such a radio would be configured, it could enable consumers to switch between providers without incurring the costs of new equipment. The Division's investigation revealed, however, that no such interoperable radio is on the market and that such a radio likely would not be introduced in the near term. For example, in the important automotive channel, such a radio could not be introduced in the near term due to the engineering required to integrate radios into new vehicles. The need for equipment customized to each network means that in order to switch from XM to Sirius, or vice versa, a subscriber would have to purchase new equipment designed for the other service. In the case of a factory-installed car radio, switching satellite radio providers would have the additional disadvantage of requiring an aftermarket radio that would be less integrated into the vehicle's systems. Data analyzed by the Division confirmed that subscribers rarely switch between XM and Sirius.

As to new subscribers, XM and Sirius sell satellite radios and service primarily through two distribution channels: (1) car manufacturers that install the equipment in new cars and (2) mass-market retailers that sell automobile aftermarket equipment and other stand-alone equipment. Car manufacturers account for an increasingly large portion of XM and Sirius sales, and the parties have focused more and more of their resources on attracting subscribers through the car manufacturer channel. Historically, XM and Sirius engaged in head-to-head competition for the right to distribute their products and services through each car company. As a result of this competitive process, XM and Sirius have provided car manufacturers with subsidies and other payments that indirectly reduce the equipment prices paid by car buyers to obtain a satellite radio. However, XM and Sirius have entered into sole-source contracts with all the major automobile manufacturers that fix the amount of these subsidies and other pertinent terms through 2012 or beyond. Moreover, there was no evidence that competition between XM or Sirius beyond the terms of these contracts would affect customers' choices of which car to buy. As a result, there is not likely to be significant competition between XM and Sirius for satellite radio equipment and service sold through the car manufacturer channel for many years.

The Division's investigation identified the mass-market retail channel as an arena in which XM and Sirius would compete with one another for the foreseeable future. Both XM and Sirius devote substantial effort and expense to attracting subscribers in this arena, with both companies offering discounts, most commonly in the form of equipment rebates, to attract consumers. Retail channel sales have dropped significantly since 2005, and the parties contended that the decline was accelerating. However, retail outlets still account for a large portion of the firms' sales, and the Division was unable to determine with any certainty that this channel would not continue to be important in the future.

Effect on Competition in the Retail Channel

Because XM and Sirius would no longer compete with one another in the retail channel following the merger, the Division examined what alternatives, if any, were available to consumers interested in purchasing satellite radio service, and specifically whether the relevant market was limited to the two satellite radio providers, such that their combination would create a monopoly. The parties contended that they compete with a variety of other sources of audio entertainment, including traditional AM/FM radio, HD Radio, MP3 players (e.g., iPods®), and audio offerings delivered through wireless telephones. Those options, used individually or in combination, offer many consumers attributes of satellite radio service that they may find attractive. The parties further contended that these audio entertainment alternatives were sufficient to prevent the merged company from profitably raising prices to consumers in the retail channel - for example, through less discounting of equipment prices, increased subscription prices, or reductions in the quality of equipment or service.

The Division found that evidence developed in the investigation did not support defining a market limited to the two satellite radio firms, and similarly did not establish that the combined firm could profitably sustain an increased price to satellite radio consumers. XM and Sirius seek to attract subscribers in a wide variety of ways, including by offering commercial-free music (with digital sound quality), exclusive programming (such as Howard Stern on Sirius and "Oprah & Friends" on XM), niche music formats, out-of-market sporting events, and a variety of news and talk formats in a service that is accessible nationwide. The variety of these offerings reflects an effort to attract consumers with highly differentiated interests and tastes. Thus, while the satellite radio offerings of XM and Sirius likely are the closest substitutes for some current or potential customers, the two offerings do not appear to be the closest substitutes for other current or potential customers. For example, a potential customer considering purchasing XM service primarily to listen to Major League Baseball games or one considering purchasing Sirius service primarily to listen to Howard Stern may not view the other satellite radio service, which lacks the desired content, as a particularly close substitute. Similarly, many customers buying radios in the retail channel are acquiring an additional receiver to add to an existing XM or Sirius subscription for their car radio, and these customers likely would not respond to a price increase by choosing a radio linked to the other satellite radio provider. The evidence did not demonstrate that the number of current or potential customers that view XM and Sirius as the closest alternatives is large enough to make a price increase profitable. Importantly in this regard, the parties do not appear to have the ability to identify and price discriminate against those actual or potential customers that view XM and Sirius as the closest substitutes.

Likely Efficiencies

To the extent there were some concern that the combined firm might be able profitably to increase prices in the mass-market retail channel, efficiencies flowing from the transaction likely would undermine any such concern. The Division's investigation confirmed that the parties are likely to realize significant variable and fixed cost savings through the merger. It was not possible to estimate the magnitude of the efficiencies with precision due to the lack of evidentiary support provided by XM and Sirius, and many of the efficiencies claimed by the parties were not credited or were discounted because they did not reflect improvements in economic welfare, could have been achieved without the proposed transaction, or were not likely to be realized within the next several years. Nevertheless, the Division estimated the likely variable cost savings - those savings most likely to be passed on to consumers in the form of lower prices - to be substantial. For example, the merger is likely to allow the parties to consolidate development, production and distribution efforts on a single line of radios and thereby eliminate duplicative costs and realize economies of scale. These efficiencies alone likely would be sufficient to undermine an inference of competitive harm.

Effect of Technological Change

Any inference of a competitive concern was further limited by the fact that a number of technology platforms are under development that are likely to offer new or improved alternatives to satellite radio. Most notable is the expected introduction within several years of next-generation wireless networks capable of streaming Internet radio to mobile devices. While it is difficult to predict which of these alternatives will be successful and the precise timing of their availability as an attractive alternative, a significant number of consumers in the future are likely to consider one or more of these platforms as an attractive alternative to satellite radio. The likely evolution of technology played an important role in the Division's assessment of competitive effects in the longer term because, for example, consumers are likely to have access to new alternatives, including mobile broadband Internet devices, by the time the current long-term contracts between the parties and car manufacturers expire.

The Division's Closing Statement Policy The Division provides this statement under its policy of issuing statements concerning the closing of investigations in appropriate cases. This statement is limited by the Division's obligation to protect the confidentiality of certain information obtained in its investigations. As in most of its investigations, the Division's evaluation has been highly fact-specific, and many of the relevant underlying facts are not public. Consequently, readers should not draw overly broad conclusions regarding how the Division is likely in the future to analyze other collaborations or activities, or transactions involving particular firms. Enforcement decisions are made on a case-by-case basis, and the analysis and conclusions discussed in this statement do not bind the Division in any future enforcement actions. Guidance on the Division's policy regarding closing statements is available at: http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/public/guidelines/201888.htm.


----------



## James Long

CNNMoney.com said:


> The Federal Communications Commission must also approve the deal before it can officially be completed. The FCC has yet to make a decision on the deal.


Not likely to be a problem?


----------



## Chuck W

James Long said:


> Not likely to be a problem?


Probably not, BUT I'm guessing there will be quite a few conditions attached.


----------



## tunce

...and now for the news of today’s date 2/15/11 XM/Sirus have filed chapter 128 receivership and will no longer be broadcasting their signals and all 10,000 customers will be out their annual payments.

Sorry but there is no way satellite radio will survive, there is no market for a "paid" radio. The people that pay for it now are mainly the diehards. Why do you think the merger happened? They are both financially struggling.


----------



## Chuck W

tunce said:


> ...and now for the news of today's date 2/15/11 XM/Sirus have filed chapter 128 receivership and will no longer be broadcasting their signals and all 10,000 customers will be out their annual payments.
> 
> Sorry but there is no way satellite radio will survive, there is no market for a "paid" radio. The people that pay for it now are mainly the diehards. Why do you think the merger happened? They are both financially struggling.


Lots of people once said that about satellite TV too. A merged company now can concentrate on the financials better and not outdoing one another by overspending. The sub numbers(MILLIONS) don't lie. IMO, sat radio will be around for a LONG time.


----------



## Earl Bonovich

tunce said:


> ...and now for the news of today's date 2/15/11 XM/Sirus have filed chapter 128 receivership and will no longer be broadcasting their signals and all 10,000 customers will be out their annual payments.
> 
> Sorry but there is no way satellite radio will survive, there is no market for a "paid" radio. The people that pay for it now are mainly the diehards. Why do you think the merger happened? They are both financially struggling.


Because the market could not support TWO sat radio companies.
But there is definently room for 1 large company.

Especially with some of the exclusive radio programming they carry.

I found it so frustrating this weekend, when I could only get one NCAA game, on the radio... and it wasn't the one I was intrested in.

There are a LOT of cross country drivers (truckers)... that can benefit greatly from a consistant radio signal from start to finish.

(I say this as I get ready to drive 6 hours across Indiana this weekend, and just called the rental company to make sure I get a car with SAT Radio).


----------



## James Long

tunce said:


> Sorry but there is no way satellite radio will survive, there is no market for a "paid" radio. The people that pay for it now are mainly the diehards. Why do you think the merger happened? They are both financially struggling.


Not really the topic of the thread ... but as long as there are people willing to pay well over $100 per month for "Premier" or "Everything" TV packages (and some people buying both services) there will be a market for pay radio. Especially sports and talk coverage that isn't available in the local markets.


----------



## wilbur_the_goose

An interesting paragraph from the DOJ news release:

As to existing subscribers, the Division found that satellite radio equipment sold by each company is customized to each network and will not function with the other service. XM and Sirius made some efforts to develop an interoperable radio capable of receiving both sets of satellite signals. Depending on how such a radio would be configured, it could enable consumers to switch between providers without incurring the costs of new equipment. The Division’s investigation revealed, however, that no such interoperable radio is on the market and that such a radio likely would not be introduced in the near term. For example, in the important automotive channel, such a radio could not be introduced in the near term due to the engineering required to integrate radios into new vehicles. The need for equipment customized to each network means that in order to switch from XM to Sirius, or vice versa, a subscriber would have to purchase new equipment designed for the other service. In the case of a factory-installed car radio, switching satellite radio providers would have the additional disadvantage of requiring an aftermarket radio that would be less integrated into the vehicle’s systems. Data analyzed by the Division confirmed that subscribers rarely switch between XM and Sirius.


----------



## mhayes70

tunce said:


> ...and now for the news of today's date 2/15/11 XM/Sirus have filed chapter 128 receivership and will no longer be broadcasting their signals and all 10,000 customers will be out their annual payments.
> 
> Sorry but there is no way satellite radio will survive, there is no market for a "paid" radio. The people that pay for it now are mainly the diehards. Why do you think the merger happened? They are both financially struggling.


I had Sirius and now have XM only because I have a Chevy and that is what came with it. I miss Sirius very much. I like there programming better.

Both, my wife and I have XM in our cars and we listen to most of the time. Short trips and long trips. It is much easier always having a station no matter where you are and not having to search for one or listen to static. I also love no commercials.


----------



## tcusta00

The merged company will have around 20 million subscribers. Out of the ~115 million households in the US, I'd say a 17% market share is admirable.


----------



## tunce

You can think what you want I still think they will fold. Just my opinon


----------



## James Long

tunce said:


> You can think what you want I still think they will fold. Just my opinon


In America you have the right to be wrong ... and we'll let you be wrong here too!


----------



## tcusta00

tunce said:


> You can think what you want I still think they will fold. Just my opinon


Which you're entitled to. 

Directv: ~16 million subscribers. Not profitable until FYE 2005
XM/Siri: ~20 million subscribers. Not profitable yet.


----------



## PMA

This is interesting even though I am not a subscriber. Why would the DOJ allow this but not the Dish/DirecTV merger a few years ago?


----------



## phat78boy

wilbur_the_goose said:


> Why is it wonderful?
> 
> As an XM'er, I'm not so sure.


Football.


----------



## Tiebmbr

Now, what does this mean for D*'s XM music feed? Will it now include Sirius stations as well?


----------



## tcusta00

Tiebmbr said:


> Now, what does this mean for D*'s XM music feed? Will it now include Sirius stations as well?


http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=122673


----------



## Tiebmbr

tcusta00 said:


> http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=122673


It's been a while since I looked...Thanks!


----------



## tiger2005

tcusta00 said:


> Which you're entitled to.
> 
> Directv: ~16 million subscribers. Not profitable until FYE 2005
> XM/Siri: ~20 million subscribers. Not profitable yet.


Those numbers alone proves there's a market.


----------



## tiger2005

PMA said:


> This is interesting even though I am not a subscriber. Why would the DOJ allow this but not the Dish/DirecTV merger a few years ago?


Circumstances are totally different. There's A LOT more competition within the radio/portable device market than in the TV provider market.


----------



## tcusta00

PMA said:


> This is interesting even though I am not a subscriber. Why would the DOJ allow this but not the Dish/DirecTV merger a few years ago?





tiger2005 said:


> Circumstances are totally different. There's A LOT more competition within the radio/portable device market than in the TV provider market.


And you forgot about the ubiquity of the cable company's lobbyists on the hill.


----------



## tiger2005

wilbur_the_goose said:


> An interesting paragraph from the DOJ news release:
> 
> As to existing subscribers, the Division found that satellite radio equipment sold by each company is customized to each network and will not function with the other service. XM and Sirius made some efforts to develop an interoperable radio capable of receiving both sets of satellite signals. Depending on how such a radio would be configured, it could enable consumers to switch between providers without incurring the costs of new equipment. The Division's investigation revealed, however, that no such interoperable radio is on the market and that such a radio likely would not be introduced in the near term. For example, in the important automotive channel, such a radio could not be introduced in the near term due to the engineering required to integrate radios into new vehicles. The need for equipment customized to each network means that in order to switch from XM to Sirius, or vice versa, a subscriber would have to purchase new equipment designed for the other service. In the case of a factory-installed car radio, switching satellite radio providers would have the additional disadvantage of requiring an aftermarket radio that would be less integrated into the vehicle's systems. Data analyzed by the Division confirmed that subscribers rarely switch between XM and Sirius.


I don't think that really makes much of a difference. If you have XM you can continue to get the programming you paid for and vice versa with Sirius. Also, who's to say that they can't ADD Sirius and XM feeds to each other's satellites and you decide on the package you want? Obviously that all depends on the bandwidth available, but since these are audio only streams, for the most part, I'd hope they'd have the capacity for this change.
Also, all of that would just need to happen until they issue a new radio capable of receiving the two different sat feeds. I can't imagine that would be very far off now that this thing is finally being approved.


----------



## PMA

tiger2005 said:


> Circumstances are totally different. There's A LOT more competition within the radio/portable device market than in the TV provider market.


Isn't the competition really cable companies vs. sattelite and aren't there lots of those while there are only two of the latter?


----------



## reddice

This stinks. I really enjoy XM music programming and hate Sirius music programing. If Mel is running the program, expect more one artist channels. All you people keep talking about is sports. I don't care one bit about sports or talk I got it for music. After listing to Sirius on Dish Network with their horrible program I am glad I have XM but if they merge I will be canceling. Also they won't say it but our rates will end up going up. Still can't believe the DOJ approved this but would not merge Dish/DirecTV thing. Lets just hope the FCC does not approve it. Keep Sirius crappy music programing on Sirius. http://www.dbstalk.com/images/smilies/mad.gif


----------



## NYBuddy

PMA said:


> This is interesting even though I am not a subscriber. Why would the DOJ allow this but not the Dish/DirecTV merger a few years ago?


That merger would have not been competitive enough for the millions that live where there would be no other supplier (IE Cable). If you live in the middle of nowhere with no access to a cable company then the only option would have been this only Satellite company... can you say price gouging! Satellite radio is available everywhere, so is IPOD, MP3, and terrestrial radio.


----------



## tiger2005

reddice said:


> This stinks. I really enjoy XM music programming and hate Sirius music programing. If Mel is running the program, expect more one artist channels. All you people keep talking about is sports. I don't care one bit about sports or talk I got it for music. After listing to Sirius on Dish Network with their horrible program I am glad I have XM but if they merge I will be canceling. Also they won't say it but our rates will end up going up. Still can't believe the DOJ approved this but would not merge Dish/DirecTV thing. Lets just hope the FCC does not approve it. Keep Sirius crappy music programing on Sirius. http://www.dbstalk.com/images/smilies/mad.gif


Mel already stated, in testimony before Congress, that rates would NOT be going up. As has already been stated, it wouldn't help them to raise rates on a service that competes with ipods, and FREE terrestrial radio.

As far as music goes, everyone has their own tastes. Personally, I couldn't deal with having commercials on music stations. To me that would totally defeat the idea of paying for the sat. radio service in the first place.


----------



## archer75

reddice said:


> This stinks. I really enjoy XM music programming and hate Sirius music programing. If Mel is running the program, expect more one artist channels. All you people keep talking about is sports. I don't care one bit about sports or talk I got it for music. After listing to Sirius on Dish Network with their horrible program I am glad I have XM but if they merge I will be canceling. Also they won't say it but our rates will end up going up. Still can't believe the DOJ approved this but would not merge Dish/DirecTV thing. Lets just hope the FCC does not approve it. Keep Sirius crappy music programing on Sirius. http://www.dbstalk.com/images/smilies/mad.gif


I actually prefer sirius, greatly. And I have subscribed to both. But what this merger means is lower prices, al a carte channels and access to all content from each service. It's win win.

They announced packaging and pricing long ago should the merger go through.


----------



## njblackberry

We've had XM for years. Love it. I think the merger is great; separately they could not survive. Merged they have a better chance. I believe prices will rise (as they do everywhere) but it is a choice I make to keep it.

Dual network equipment would be great, but switching costs would be too high...

This is good news.


----------



## Ken S

PMA said:


> This is interesting even though I am not a subscriber. Why would the DOJ allow this but not the Dish/DirecTV merger a few years ago?


Dish and DirecTV are the only choices for TV in many areas (mostly rural). That merger would have created a monopoly situation for those folks. AM/FM, etc are available everywhere...so the merger won't create the same type of situation.


----------



## Ken S

On another note...it won't be that many years before SiriusXM is also competing with DirecTV and Dish for TV viewers. They already have a mobile TV product in testing.


----------



## ysiamrich

reddice said:


> This stinks. I really enjoy XM music programming and hate Sirius music programing. If Mel is running the program, expect more one artist channels. All you people keep talking about is sports. I don't care one bit about sports or talk I got it for music. After listing to Sirius on Dish Network with their horrible program I am glad I have XM but if they merge I will be canceling. Also they won't say it but our rates will end up going up. Still can't believe the DOJ approved this but would not merge Dish/DirecTV thing. Lets just hope the FCC does not approve it. Keep Sirius crappy music programing on Sirius.
> 
> As with everything, it all depends on your preference. I have sirius and used XM in rentals. I was never able to find a station on XM that I enjoy as much as my three favvorite music stations on Sirius.


----------



## tvjay

James Long said:


> Not likely to be a problem?


Except that somewhere in the FCC license, if I remember correctly, it says that one company can not own both licenses. So the combined company would have to give up half of the frequency currently allocated to them. I could of course be wrong, but in a tech article somewhere (I will look later) it quoted the FCC license that said that one company could not own both licenses. This may not stop the merger but would sort of limit the options the combined company has if this is correct.


----------



## codespy

Maybe DTV and its sophisticated hardware/software engineers can help develop a DRR (Digital Radio Recorder) for the merger as a new option, then a new thread on 'DRR issues' can be started here with subscribers taking left and rights at each other on the issues, sometimes for no reason at all.


----------



## syphix

tvjay said:


> Except that somewhere in the FCC license, if I remember correctly, it says that one company can not own both licenses. So the combined company would have to give up half of the frequency currently allocated to them. I could of course be wrong, but in a tech article somewhere (I will look later) it quoted the FCC license that said that one company could not own both licenses. This may not stop the merger but would sort of limit the options the combined company has if this is correct.


"Rules" were made to be broken...or re-written.

I wouldn't be surprised if the FCC said "Okay....if you make x% of your bandwidth available to non-profit programmers and that ANYone (subscriber or not) would be able to receive that programming." Whether or not XM/SIRIUS agree to the concessions is completely dependent on how big "x" is.


----------



## Lord Vader

tunce said:


> Sorry but there is no way satellite radio will survive, there is no market for a "paid" radio. The people that pay for it now are mainly the diehards. Why do you think the merger happened? They are both financially struggling.


I used to think this way. After all, who wants to pay for something that's "supposed" to be free? I've been listening to free radio for years. What cinched the deal for me was the increasingly greater number of commercials on the radio stations to which I listen each day. I bounced among sports talk, regular talk, and some FM rock stations. Eventually, the commercial time actually was greater than the actual radio time. In fact, on WLS and WSCR, more than once I actually timed the commercial time to be *more than 32 minutes per hour! *That's insane!

Sure, XM does have some channels with commercials--I don't listen to those that much, preferring the decades channels instead--but it beats regular radio hands down, and for that I'm willing to pay ~ $10/month.


----------



## johnp37

tunce said:


> You can think what you want I still think they will fold. Just my opinon [/QUOTE
> To quote the immortal "Dirty Harry" Callahan "opinions are like a******s, everybody's got one. In my opinion, Sirius/XM is going to be around a long time.


----------



## Lee L

Sixto said:


> Fabulous news. Now baseball and football on the same radio! yahoo!


Why would you think that? Everything I have read from both companies says they will be totally seperate for several years if not more than 10. At most you might be able to get 10 channels from the other service at the expense of some you have now. And those 10 channels are what they decide to give everyone, not what you decide you want.


----------



## uscboy

I hope this doesn't ruin XM.

I had Sirius in two cars for over a year and when my wife got her new G6 it came 
with XM. Took me all of 12 hours to be an XM fanboy now. 

Dropped my Sirius service just the other day and bought an XM receiver. Their 
channels are better, the music they play on the channels is better, their web 
player crushes Sirius hands down (high quality is free, shows what's playing on 
each channel), customer service is better, prices are cheaper, etc, etc.

If you like to listen to football (who does that anymore? I watch football on TV in 
HD) or if you like talk radio (not a fan of listening to someone else's opinions on 
things thank you very much), then Sirius is just fine. But for music XM rules.

I just hope they have enough sense not to force people to have one "Hits" music 
station between the two providers and then use Sirius' version. That Morning 
Mash up garbage is ridiculous - I'm not paying to hear people yap on the radio, 
I'm paying for music. And the other day they had call ins for stories out there of
people that have had to urinate or deficate in their cars.... that was the final 
straw, so I switched.


----------



## MSoper72

I hope everyone do not start counting their chickens before they hatch. Cause the FCC could say, "NO." Then this "merger" will not take place. Plus, when Dish and DirecTv gets word of this "merger." They too may get upset and demand the FCC to say no as well. Since they were told no. Think about it. This "merger" has not happened just yet.


----------



## syphix

Lee L said:


> Why would you think that? Everything I have read from both companies says they will be totally seperate for several years if not more than 10. At most you might be able to get 10 channels from the other service at the expense of some you have now. And those 10 channels are what they decide to give everyone, not what you decide you want.


IF the approval comes from the FCC, you can bet XM/SIRIUS will push to market two new types of radios: first (within 6 months), a radio that can work with the new "a la carte" packages; and second (within 12 months) , one that can see both services and simply toggle between them (like AM & FM).


----------



## cartrivision

tunce said:


> ...and now for the news of today's date 2/15/11 XM/Sirus have filed chapter 128 receivership and will no longer be broadcasting their signals and all 10,000 customers will be out their annual payments.
> 
> Sorry but there is no way satellite radio will survive, there is no market for a "paid" radio. The people that pay for it now are mainly the diehards. Why do you think the merger happened? They are both financially struggling.


Sadly for "free radio", just the opposite is true. People are abandoning "free radio" for pay based alternatives. Why do you think that the mouthpiece of the free radio industry, the NAB, was fighting so hard against this merger? I'll clue you in. It's not because they thought that the satellite radio industry wasn't taking their listeners away, and it wasn't because they thought that the satellite radio industry would be going out of business in a few years. Wake up and smell reality.


----------



## reddice

I just hope and pray that the FCC says NO to the merger.


----------



## tcusta00

reddice said:


> I just hope and pray that the FCC says NO to the merger.


Okay, I'll bite. Why?


----------



## cartrivision

Lord Vader said:


> I used to think this way. After all, who wants to pay for something that's "supposed" to be free? I've been listening to free radio for years. What cinched the deal for me was the increasingly greater number of commercials on the radio stations to which I listen each day. I bounced among sports talk, regular talk, and some FM rock stations. Eventually, the commercial time actually was greater than the actual radio time. In fact, on WLS and WSCR, more than once I actually timed the commercial time to be *more than 32 minutes per hour! *That's insane!
> 
> Sure, XM does have some channels with commercials--I don't listen to those that much, preferring the decades channels instead--but it beats regular radio hands down, and for that I'm willing to pay ~ $10/month.


Even the most listened to commercial based stations on satellite radio such as the two Stern branded channels on Sirius only have about 6 minutes of commercials an hour, compared to the industry norm of about 20 minutes an hour on "free" radio, and of course the music stations are all commercial free except for a handful of music stations on XM that the terrestrial broadcaster Clear Channel has control over.


----------



## cartrivision

Lee L said:


> Why would you think that? Everything I have read from both companies says they will be totally seperate for several years if not more than 10. At most you might be able to get 10 channels from the other service at the expense of some you have now. And those 10 channels are what they decide to give everyone, not what you decide you want.


That doesn't mean that there won't be interoperable radios available very quickly after the merger that are capable of receiving everything on both systems. Soon after the merger that's the only type of radio that will be factory installed in new cars and available in stores.


----------



## reddice

tcusta00 said:


> Okay, I'll bite. Why?


Because I don't want Sirius crappy shallow playlist, many one artist channels and annoying DJ's. I enjoy XM the way it is.


----------



## DCSholtis

O&A+Stern+combined sports on one radio=Priceless.


----------



## tcusta00

reddice said:


> Because I don't want Sirius crappy shallow playlist, many one artist channels and annoying DJ's. I enjoy XM the way it is.


Well you won't have to worry about that for a while since the services will operate separately as proposed at xmmerger.com

What's the deal with your sig, by the way - HDTV is only affordable for the niche and the rich? I don't get it.


----------



## djlong

I was opposed to this merger but could not come up with a reason why it should be legally rejected outside of the FCC rules (that are almost certainly to be rewritten now)

If XM and Sirius had compatible scrambling schemes, I would have been all for it. As it is, the only thing compatible between the two are antennas and "line out" jacks.

It is my sincere hope that the merger will *eventually* allow a couple of things..

- Merged radios.
- A trade-in program of some sort for new merged radios
- Eventual consolidation of bandwidth from common programming (the channels that are on both systems) that allow some old channels back - my personal favorite being Music Lab.

While some may prefer the 'shallower' playlists, I would hope that the merged company has enough bandwidth to accomodate both tastes - I prefer the deep ones myself. 

For what it's worth, I'll be profiting some from this (actually, more accurate to say losing less) as I'm an XM stockholder.


----------



## ajc68

MSoper72 said:


> I hope everyone do not start counting their chickens before they hatch. Cause the FCC could say, "NO." Then this "merger" will not take place. Plus, when Dish and DirecTv gets word of this "merger." They too may get upset and demand the FCC to say no as well. Since they were told no. Think about it. This "merger" has not happened just yet.


I think it will have the opposite affect on Dish and DirecTV. I beleive there is a chance they will revisit a merger. Technology has changed dramatically in the past few years. They would have been considered a monopoly at the time they attempted to merge, but maybe not this time around. There are so many more options with phone companies and Internet providing programming options, that they would no longer monopolize rural areas.


----------



## bones boy

reddice said:


> Because I don't want Sirius crappy shallow playlist, many one artist channels and annoying DJ's. I enjoy XM the way it is.


What makes you think that Sirius has crappy shallow playlists? Personally I think that XM has crappy shallow playlists. And I love my music with zero commercials.

As far as one artist channels, I'd take Rolling Stones Radio (Sirius) over (Michael Jackson) Thriller 63 (XM) any day. Although I would agree that Elvis Radio (Sirius) is probably a bit much.


----------



## pinkertonfloyd

wilbur_the_goose said:


> Why is it wonderful?
> 
> As an XM'er, I'm not so sure.


Ditto... Sirius brings nothing to the table for the XM fan.


----------



## Gilitar

tcusta00 said:


> And you forgot about the ubiquity of the cable company's lobbyists on the hill.


DING DING.... WE HAVE A WINNER!!!


----------



## Gilitar

MSoper72 said:


> I hope everyone do not start counting their chickens before they hatch. Cause the FCC could say, "NO." Then this "merger" will not take place. Plus, when Dish and DirecTv gets word of this "merger." They too may get upset and demand the FCC to say no as well. Since they were told no. Think about it. This "merger" has not happened just yet.


No, they won't get upset. But, they will use this example to push forward with a merger in the very near future.

Coming soon.... Dish Network/Directv Merger. You can bank on it!


----------



## BreezeCJ

DCSholtis said:


> O&A+Stern+combined sports on one radio=Priceless.


Finally - a Stern reference! THE #1 reason to own a sat radio, hands down.

Now if we could only get his On Demand Channel through DTV - I'd be ecstatic.


----------



## BreezeCJ

bones boy said:


> What makes you think that Sirius has crappy shallow playlists? Personally I think that XM has crappy shallow playlists. And I love my music with zero commercials.
> 
> As far as one artist channels, I'd take Rolling Stones Radio (Sirius) over (Michael Jackson) Thriller 63 (XM) any day. Although I would agree that Elvis Radio (Sirius) is probably a bit much.


*Zero* commercials is key. Plus, I enjoy the occasional rotation of single artist channels.
Springsteen, Elvis, Sinatra...now if we could only get The Beatles Channels I'd be thrilled!


----------



## reddice

At least when XM adds a one artist channel which is only 1 at the time we don't lose any channel. XM Led was added and we lost no music channel. They took XM Led off. XM Thriller was added after and we did not lose no channel. Sirius axed The Bridge, Shuffle and a Jazz station. They could have easily picked one of their 20+ Rock stations since that is rock music but no they pick a pop and jazz channels which don't have many channels already. Then they say the channel is only temporary but 6 months to a year later it is still on and then when they suppose to bring back the orginal channel they don't. Instead they add another waste like 90's Alternative which what is the point of Alt Nation. Don't get me started. That is why I am against Sirius. They always pull that and I will not want that to happen to my favorite XM channel when Mel gets through with it. The only one artist channel that is okay to keep is Elvis since Elvis is the number one artist and has a big catalog of songs.


----------



## Ken S

Hey...I hope the XM fans understand that XM wasn't going to last. They didn't have the financial backing and were getting beaten badly by Sirius in new sales/subs. A lot of that has to do with Howard Stern...who I guess is a bit more popular when it comes the pay radio crowd than Oprah or Opie & Anthony.

I'm delighted that at some point in the future I'll be able to get MLB and Howard on a single radio...and that every new car will end up having a built-in satellite radio that gets the content I want.

Will the new company survive? Can't be sure of that, but they'll have a shot and Mel Karmizan has a pretty good track record. As I stated earlier we'll also see them poking into the TV marketplace with some interesting offerings.

Ya never know...2011 rolls around you may have to get Sirius for NFL Sunday Ticket


----------



## 459707

So, if we can get twice the amount of channels, does that mean we pay twice the amount of the monthly price?

I guess they'll have to make "packages" like D* and E* have. (they would be like "Everyones top 50,100,200," and don't forget the "total choice premium gold extra plus pack" that has ALL of the channels for an outrageous price per month that some people would actually pay.)


----------



## tcusta00

Check out xmmerger.com for details of proposed packages. You can keep what you have or add stuff from the other provider a la carte.


----------



## wilbur_the_goose

Remember the day when D* and E* announced "the merger"?

How'd that work out?


----------



## Ken S

wilbur_the_goose said:


> Remember the day when D* and E* announced "the merger"?
> 
> How'd that work out?


And your point is? XM and Sirius announced this merger over a year ago. The DoJ and FCC have sat on this for a record period of time. The Department of Justice has determined that it would not be a monopoly and is in compliance with US law. The FCC has yet to render a decision, but is expected to do so shortly.

DirecTV and Echostar's merger was a very different situation as already discussed in this thread.


----------



## syphix

wilbur_the_goose said:


> Remember the day when D* and E* announced "the merger"?
> 
> How'd that work out?


DOJ AND FCC blocked it. So far, the DOJ has said they are not opposed to the XM/SIRIUS merger.

And the FCC has never blocked a DOJ "approval".

They're not just 50% there, they're further than that....say, 65% complete.


----------



## emrmc

so after reading 3 pages, I am surprised no one has brought up the idea of just broadcasting the same popular content to each service. 

I think xm and sirius broadcast 120 channels each, sirius can run their 20 most popular channels on the 20 lowest rated xm channels and xm can broadcast their top 20 on sirius bottom 20. no need to make a dual reception radio unless they want to max the bandwidth which is down the road. Because they (xm/sirius) now own all the content they can broadcast it anyway they want. The channels are not locked like they are in TV. They own all the channels and the content. Very different than TV. They can do whatever they want. 

And anyone that doesn't think the FCC will approve this hasn't been listening to the FCC head who will approve this almost solely based on the ala carte option. He wants his legacy to be that he brought ala carte to not only Sat Radio but also cable providers which is his big prize. (smart play by Mel K)

Mel K pushed the ala carte proposal to put them over the edge, so he will have to do some kind of version of it, but in reality they will not need to. 

As for the D* /E* merger issue, they do not relate to Radio. Not because Sat would be the only option to Rural folks but because cable companies continue to enjoy NO competition from other cable providers because they are regulated.

I don't know about you but where I live (PA) I have 1 choice for cable and 2 for Sat TV and thats it for TV. Once Comcast, Time Warner, Cox all get equal play in all markets than you can ask why the 2 sat companies can not merge. It has more to do with cable's lack of competition than the monopoly that E*/D* would create.

To answer the Howard TV on Directv, the answer to that is Amazon Unbox, why InDemand hasn't partnered with Amazon is beyond me. Directv can partner with Amazon like Tivo has and deliver all kinds of VOD. Unbox has much more content than the D* VOD they are offcially launching later this year.


----------



## ChrisPC

Ken S said:


> A lot of that has to do with Howard Stern...who I guess is a bit more popular when it comes the pay radio crowd than Oprah or Opie & Anthony.


Oprah left XM several months ago. She's starting her own TV channel. :nono2:


----------



## James Long

ChrisPC said:


> Oprah left XM several months ago. She's starting her own TV channel. :nono2:


Actually taking over another channel and turning it into her video playground ... but that's another topic.

The new price plans look pretty good. I believe SiriusXM will attract more customers with a minimum monthly cost (especially those who bought pre-installed radios). $7 or $10 is a lot easier to handle than $13 plus ... especially for customers who don't want to pay one penny for content they will never listen to.


----------



## MSoper72

ajc68 said:


> I think it will have the opposite affect on Dish and DirecTV. I beleive there is a chance they will revisit a merger. Technology has changed dramatically in the past few years. They would have been considered a monopoly at the time they attempted to merge, but maybe not this time around. There are so many more options with phone companies and Internet providing programming options, that they would no longer monopolize rural areas.


True, but just have to sit back and wait and see what happens. They might push the "merger" possibility again. Yet, just no tellin' at this time what Dish and Direct might do.


----------



## Ken S

ChrisPC said:


> Oprah left XM several months ago. She's starting her own TV channel. :nono2:


No, she's still on XM...or at least her channel is.


----------



## Ken S

ajc68 said:


> I think it will have the opposite affect on Dish and DirecTV. I beleive there is a chance they will revisit a merger. Technology has changed dramatically in the past few years. They would have been considered a monopoly at the time they attempted to merge, but maybe not this time around. There are so many more options with phone companies and Internet providing programming options, that they would no longer monopolize rural areas.


Except you still don't have much more coverage of those rural areas. They can't get IPTV without a broadband connection. In many areas the best someone can hope for is one cable company and the two satellite providers.


----------



## scr

Good News on the merger....

I dropped XM right after my free 3 months I got with my new truck. 

To much stuff I'd never listen to. Give me the few I'm interested in and a good price I'd sign up today. The proposed price of $6.99 for 50 will do just fine. In fact I will be hard pressed to find 50 I would really listen to, more like 10 is all I need.

Anyone know if the A la Carte will work on existing equipment if all of my choices are on XM?

s.


----------



## Richard King

ChrisPC said:


> Oprah left XM several months ago. She's starting her own TV channel. :nono2:


She's still there, not that I ever would waste my time listening to the garbage, but they are constantly promoting her programs.


----------



## wilbur_the_goose

Actually, I just don't want any of my $$$ to go to Howard Stern. I'm not some nutso right wing guy - I just don't like his show. Once you get over 30, his humor becomes pretty tiresome. 

But I'm hoping for the best


----------



## mainehazmt

I bought sirius for 1 reason the nascar channel Id be happy with a 2 channel radio but doubt prices will ever go down


----------



## uscboy

As long as I can still use my existing radio (which yes, I know I can) but also 
recieve XM Hitlist (30), Top 20 (20), Flight Deck (26) and Lucy (54), then I'll be 
more than happy if this is what it takes for the companies to stay afloat.

But so help me if XM's Hitlist and Top 20 channels are removed in favor of Sirius 
Hits 1 and their garbage they play and all the yapping of DJs, then I'd really have 
to question the folks in charge of this merger. The equiv. Sirius channels to those 
I listed above don't compare. Not only aren't there equal number of comparable 
channels - no Top 20 equiv. channel - but what the equiv. channels play is worse 
on Sirius. Much less mainstream stuff.

But, just like MTV and CMT and many other radio programs down the road, music 
only makes you so much money - for some reason folks out there LOVE listening 
to other people run their mouths on the radio/TV instead... so, slowly good music 
sources change formats...


----------



## tkrandall

So, what is the technical path XM/Sirius intends to follow with their satellites and receivers?

Are they going to continue to operate two seperate incompatible networks for the long term? That would not appear to provide much opportunity for optimizing frequency allocations across more channel options. Will they not be pursuing some sort of technology/platform migration strategy? 

What about the two different means of achieving coverage from the satellites? XM uses geostationary orbit with a fixed line of sight to their two locations, and Sirius uses 3 satelites in highly inclined elliptical orbits biases to provide maximum time over the norther hemisphere, and that provide higher average elevation for line of sight at any given time, but the position is always moving in the sky.


----------



## Ken S

wilbur_the_goose said:


> Actually, I just don't want any of my $$$ to go to Howard Stern. I'm not some nutso right wing guy - I just don't like his show. Once you get over 30, his humor becomes pretty tiresome.
> 
> But I'm hoping for the best


Without Stern neither Sirius or XM would survive he has raised the profile of pay radio and driven millions of subscribers to Sirius. I'm well over 30 and still find him entertaining. But, that's not to say anyone should be forced to subscribe to his channels. Then again, we don't really have a lot of choice with the satellite TV companies about what channels we get...do we?


----------



## Ken S

tkrandall,

I have a feeling they are going to use one satellite method for their existing content and the other for video. I guess it's possible they could also lease the other space.



tkrandall said:


> So, what is the technical path XM/Sirius intends to follow with their sattelites and receivers?
> 
> Are they going to continue to operate two seperate incompatible networks for the long term? That would not appear to provide much opportunity for optimizing frequency allocations across more channel options. Will they not be pursuing some sort of technology/platform migration strategy?
> 
> What about the two different means of achieving coverage from the satellites? XM uses geostationary orbit with a fixed line of sight to their two locations, and Sirius uses 3 satelites in highly inclined elliptical orbits biases to provide maximum time over the norther hemisphere, and that provide higher average elevation for line of sight at any given time, but the position is always moving in the sky.


----------



## Cholly

DCSholtis said:


> O&A+Stern+combined sports on one radio=Priceless.


We have a total of four XM radios in our household: One in our Home Theater receiver, one in my bedroom (Roady XT with home adapter), a builtin one in my car and a Roady XT in my son's truck. 
Personally, I can do without talk radio completely. As to sports, I prefer to view the sport in addition to hearing it. I listen to music almost exclusively and can do without most of the other channels.


----------



## flexoffset

uscboy said:


> If you like to listen to football (who does that anymore? I watch football on TV in
> HD) or if you like talk radio (not a fan of listening to someone else's opinions on
> things thank you very much), then Sirius is just fine.


Are you oblivious to the fact that there are people in this world who have careers in the cabs of trailer trucks and farm equipment. While the cab of a John Deere 9430 _is_ roomy, it will not accommodate an HDTV. I spend many Saturdays during football season listening to my football team while driving a tractor.

Every truck driver I know has at least one satellite radio. Many salesmen I know have it, too. A lot of farmers have put sirius or xm radios in the cab of their tractors.

I don't have a problem with XM or Sirius - I have both. 
Before bashing or applauding the decision, I'm gonna wait to see how it pans out.


----------



## homeskillet

I have both services and I love channels on both sides. I'm going to wait and se what happens, but if given the choice, I'll keep Sirius (more hardware investment) and I would love to add XM's Fred and Lucy channels, maybe UPOP as well.


----------



## Lee L

emrmc said:


> so after reading 3 pages, I am surprised no one has brought up the idea of just broadcasting the same popular content to each service.
> 
> I think xm and sirius broadcast 120 channels each, sirius can run their 20 most popular channels on the 20 lowest rated xm channels and xm can broadcast their top 20 on sirius bottom 20. no need to make a dual reception radio unless they want to max the bandwidth which is down the road. Because they (xm/sirius) now own all the content they can broadcast it anyway they want. The channels are not locked like they are in TV. They own all the channels and the content. Very different than TV. They can do whatever they want.


But the whole point of Satellite Radio is that you can get channels and music that would never see the light of day on regular radio. Doing this totally eliminates that. But, this is the direction that both services have been headed all along. They started out with a wide range and depth and they have become more shallow as the years have gone by.

However, eventually, I think Sat radio will find the need to differentiate themselves from terrestrial radio again.


----------



## judson_west

I found this report http://www.nab.org/xert/corpcomm/pressrel/releases/031607_MSW_XM_SIRI.pdf, sponsored by the NAB, that has some interesting information about XM and Sirius. Some of the highlights are:

1) The data capacities of both the XM and Sirius systems are filled with programming and significant spare capacity is not available. Expanding the number of program offerings on the XM or Sirius platforms through more aggressive digital compression is possible but would result in unacceptable degradation of audio quality.

2) The differences in system operation, function, and structure make the design and implementation of a single unified and interoperable receiver both complex and expensive. In fact, both XM and Sirius have been working in a joint venture to develop an interoperable radio since 2000.

So given all of this, it will be at least another year or two before a unified receiver is available on the market and more years before these radios are incorporated into new cars.


----------



## Lee L

Bingo!


----------



## Tom_S

judson_west said:


> I found this report http://www.nab.org/xert/corpcomm/pressrel/releases/031607_MSW_XM_SIRI.pdf, sponsored by the NAB, that has some interesting information about XM and Sirius. Some of the highlights are:
> 
> 1) The data capacities of both the XM and Sirius systems are filled with programming and significant spare capacity is not available. Expanding the number of program offerings on the XM or Sirius platforms through more aggressive digital compression is possible but would result in unacceptable degradation of audio quality.
> 
> 2) The differences in system operation, function, and structure make the design and implementation of a single unified and interoperable receiver both complex and expensive. In fact, both XM and Sirius have been working in a joint venture to develop an interoperable radio since 2000.
> 
> So given all of this, it will be at least another year or two before a unified receiver is available on the market and more years before these radios are incorporated into new cars.


Well, we'll see about that! The NAB is not exactly gonna paint a rosy picture!


----------



## judson_west

The NAB may have sponsored the report, but I don't think the facts are erroneous.


----------



## Rob Dawn

scr said:


> Anyone know if the A la Carte will work on existing equipment if all of my choices are on XM?


I was wondering the exact same thing. Anyone know the answer??? 

If so, this merger would be a huge win for me as the Top50 deal for $6.99 would be great for me, with the addition of "Fungus" and "20 on 20" I'd be down to $7.49/month.

Rob


----------



## Sander

unr1 said:


> wonderful news
> 
> I'm excited


Why? No competition means higher subscription costs, no incentive to improve quality, programming, etc.


----------



## tcusta00

Competition was killing them - they were spending money on marketing - now they can focus on content.


----------



## tiger2005

judson_west said:


> I found this report http://www.nab.org/xert/corpcomm/pressrel/releases/031607_MSW_XM_SIRI.pdf, sponsored by the NAB, that has some interesting information about XM and Sirius. Some of the highlights are:
> 
> 1) The data capacities of both the XM and Sirius systems are filled with programming and significant spare capacity is not available. Expanding the number of program offerings on the XM or Sirius platforms through more aggressive digital compression is possible but would result in unacceptable degradation of audio quality.
> 
> 2) The differences in system operation, function, and structure make the design and implementation of a single unified and interoperable receiver both complex and expensive. In fact, both XM and Sirius have been working in a joint venture to develop an interoperable radio since 2000.
> 
> So given all of this, it will be at least another year or two before a unified receiver is available on the market and more years before these radios are incorporated into new cars.


I also had someone that likes to smoke pot tell me once that pot was better for you, with less chance of developing cancer, than cigarettes. Their source: a study at marijuana.com.  Not exactly an impartial source. What do that study and my story have in common? Both cited a source that wasn't impartial in the outcome, and both were wrong.


----------



## Chris Freeland

Once the deal is complete, I may re-activate my XM and go with the $6.99 pick 50 plan.


----------



## uscboy

flexoffset said:


> Are you oblivious to the fact that there are people in this world who have careers in the cabs of trailer trucks and farm equipment. While the cab of a John Deere 9430 _is_ roomy, it will not accommodate an HDTV. I spend many Saturdays during football season listening to my football team while driving a tractor.
> 
> Every truck driver I know has at least one satellite radio. Many salesmen I know have it, too. A lot of farmers have put sirius or xm radios in the cab of their tractors.
> 
> I don't have a problem with XM or Sirius - I have both.
> Before bashing or applauding the decision, I'm gonna wait to see how it pans out.


That's fine - and I'm obviously aware of that... but that a satellite radio company 
does not make.

If they had to rely on truckers for their market, neither company would exist. I 
still say for the masses that football on the radio.... meh. This isn't 1950.


----------



## ld323

I wonder if the lifetime memberships for $500 will still be available???

And HOW LONG should I wait for this to complete?!?!

I'm desperate for satellite radio but I want to be able to buy a receiver that will pick up both signals!!


----------



## Tom_S

Chris Freeland said:


> Once the deal is complete, I may re-activate my XM and go with the $6.99 pick 50 plan.


You will need a new next-generation sat radio for that plan. Current radios will not be compatible with the ala carte plan.


----------



## Uncle Freddy

Rob Dawn said:


> I was wondering the exact same thing. Anyone know the answer???
> 
> If so, this merger would be a huge win for me as the Top50 deal for $6.99 would be great for me, with the addition of "Fungus" and "20 on 20" I'd be down to $7.49/month.
> 
> Rob


New radios are required to get the A la Carte packages. How much these will cost and when they will be available hasn't been announced.


----------



## tkrandall

Uncle Freddy said:


> New radios are required to get the A la Carte packages. How much these will cost and when they will be available hasn't been announced.


really?! that could be years away, couldn't it?


----------



## tcusta00

tkrandall said:


> really?! that could be years away, couldn't it?


The new radios have already been in development throughout the merger, from what I understand.


----------



## Lee L

Well, in theory, the new radios that could get both services have been in development since day one of SDARS since it is a requirement of the licensing terms.

Personally, I will be surprised if there is any combo unit availble sooner than 1 year after the closure of the merger if it does go through.


----------



## judson_west

tiger2005 said:


> I also had someone that likes to smoke pot tell me once that pot was better for you, with less chance of developing cancer, than cigarettes. Their source: a study at marijuana.com.  Not exactly an impartial source. What do that study and my story have in common? Both cited a source that wasn't impartial in the outcome, and both were wrong.


So what ur saying is that there is plenty of capacity on both systems to allow for overlap programming and that the systems are not that incompatible so there should be no trouble in manufacturing a receiver that can receiver both signals.

If this is the case, I'm sure XM/Sirius would love to hear from you. :nono:


----------



## mightymouse

Uncle Freddy said:


> New radios are required to get the A la Carte packages. How much these will cost and when they will be available hasn't been announced.


The way I read it, the pick 50 is only XM or Sirius, you can't pick and choose between the two. The pick 100, however, you can. Therefore a new radio would be necessary for the 100, but I don't see it necessary for the 50.


----------



## ehilbert1

I don't think it will be a big deal for people to buy new radios. I go to Siriusbackstage all the time and those guys switch radios like underwear. As soon the Stilleto 2 came out people rushed to upgrade. I think this will be great.

As for people thinking they will fold because no one will pay for radio..... I had a lot of friends that felt that way and then they tried Sirius. No comercials and uncensored radio........ That sold them in 1 week. None of us ever listen to regular radio. HD radio is a joke. You still get commercials,its all censored and lets see you drive cross country and listen to the same station. Oh wait a minute you can't.


----------



## tcusta00

ehilbert1 said:


> I don't think it will be a big deal for people to buy new radios.


How about when it's installed by the OEM in your vehicle.  

Just bought a new Honda that I plan to have for at least 5 years or so. Now what?


----------



## Lee L

The integrated radios are the problem. Many people will not have a radio stuck on their dash no matter what or the only reason they subbed is because it was built in. Kind of silly to have a $40k BMW with steering wheel controls and have to reach up to your Skyfi suctioned to the window to change channels.


----------



## ehilbert1

tcusta00 said:


> How about when it's installed by the OEM in your vehicle.
> 
> Just bought a new Honda that I plan to have for at least 5 years or so. Now what?


Hopefully they will come out with a "Brain" for those so you can get both services. I have a friend who has a GM and it came with XM. He wanted Sirius real bad. They ended up coming out with a new brain for his unit so he could have Sirius. It cost him $100 and he put it in himself. I would hope they could just do that for both services.


----------



## Rich

wilbur_the_goose said:


> Actually, I just don't want any of my $$$ to go to Howard Stern. I'm not some nutso right wing guy - I just don't like his show. Once you get over 30, his humor becomes pretty tiresome.
> 
> But I'm hoping for the best


Just an Imus wannabe. And I prefer Imus. And I don't listen to him anymore either. Sports talk radio in the NY area is the best in the country, just an opinion. But I know there is nothing like Mike and the Mad Dog or Max Kellerman on XM. XM does have a MLB station, but doesn't compare to the FAN or NYC's ESPNradio.

Rich


----------



## Rich

tiger2005 said:


> I also had someone that likes to smoke pot tell me once that pot was better for you, with less chance of developing cancer, than cigarettes. Their source: a study at marijuana.com. Not exactly an impartial source.


Here's a source that kinda hard to argue with: When Nixon was President, he commissioned an extensive study of the terrible effects of marijuana. It's purpose was to gather support for the war on drugs.

I bought a copy of that study, read it, was puzzled and read it again. I found nothing negative about it. I read reviews of that study and I read about how embarrassed Nixon was by the conclusions of the study. The study found one major danger: People were being incarcerated for using, selling and possessing an innocuous weed that actually has great medicinal powers. At the time, that study was thought to be one of the most impartial studies ever commissioned by a government official or department.

I'm not a proponent of drug use, but I believe that what you do in the privacy of your home, as long as no one is harmed, it's your business.

Now that you opened the door, I can't think of anything much dumber than smoking cigarettes. A known carcinogen being sold to anyone at any time. And to top off the long range problems with cigarettes, it's so addictive it's practically impossible to stop.

That felt good!

Rich


----------



## Chris Freeland

Tom_S said:


> You will need a new next-generation sat radio for that plan. Current radios will not be compatible with the ala carte plan.


What is your source? From my understanding the $6.99 pick 50 plan is 50 channels of XM or 50 channels of Sirius, not a few from each service, their should be no tech reason why this service should not be available on legacy radio's. Now the $9.99 pick 100 pack is a different story because you can mix and match from both services, with this you would need a new radio. My guess is that only package's with both XM and Sirius channels would need new radio's. I suspect new radio's will be available after the merger, how difficult will it be to combine 2 tuners in one box? I suspect they have already worked on this.


----------



## James Long

Chris Freeland said:


> What is your source?


A good source would be the http://siriusmerger.com/ and http://xmmerger.com/ websites where they discuss these options and state:
_*Available only for subscribers using next generation receivers who select channels via the Internet._

The footnote applies to _both_ A La Carte I and II (the pick 50 and pick 100, respectively) on _both_ systems.

Sirius A La Carte I: Pick Your Own 50 (Optional: Add a Channel @ $.25 Each; Add Super Premium Packages @ $6.00 or $5.00 Each) - $6.99 plus

Sirius A La Carte II: Pick Your Own 100 (Including some best of XM) - $14.99

XM A La Carte I: Pick Your Own 50 from all but Premium (Optional: Add a Channel @$.25 each; Add Super Premium Packages @ $3.00 or $6.00 each) - $6.99 plus

XM A La Carte II: Pick Your Own 100 (Including some best of Sirius) - $14.99


----------



## tcusta00

ehilbert1 said:


> Hopefully they will come out with a "Brain" for those so you can get both services. I have a friend who has a GM and it came with XM. He wanted Sirius real bad. They ended up coming out with a new brain for his unit so he could have Sirius. It cost him $100 and he put it in himself. I would hope they could just do that for both services.


Really? That's awesome, thanks, I didn't know that this kind of option even existed. I'm sure it will be an option if the above option existed.


----------



## Cpt Guavaberry

mightymouse said:


> The way I read it, the pick 50 is only XM or Sirius, you can't pick and choose between the two. The pick 100, however, you can. Therefore a new radio would be necessary for the 100, but I don't see it necessary for the 50.


For me, I'm okay with XM programming, except I'd like to add football, NASCAR (like we had on XM at one point), and Margaritaville radio. From the looks of i I'm gonna have to wait a few more years. By then, who knows what we'll be listening to, and with or on what?? :nono2:


----------



## scr

James Long said:


> A good source would be the http://siriusmerger.com/ and http://xmmerger.com/ websites where they discuss these options and state:
> _*Available only for subscribers using next generation receivers who select channels via the Internet._
> 
> <snip>


Thanks for the links.

I'll be waiting ......


----------



## Lee L

ehilbert1 said:


> Hopefully they will come out with a "Brain" for those so you can get both services. I have a friend who has a GM and it came with XM. He wanted Sirius real bad. They ended up coming out with a new brain for his unit so he could have Sirius. It cost him $100 and he put it in himself. I would hope they could just do that for both services.


I have somethign similar in my MINI that allows me to get XM instead of Sirius which is the factory option.

However, development of all these devices have been on hold ever since the merger announcement. Blitzsafe, who made the first XM Direct adaptors for certain BMW and MINI cars decided to not make them for the next generation of those models or any other model cars. I expect that no one will do anything until teh merger closes, then with development cycles it will be another year or more before they are available.

I saw an article in the paper this AM that explained that other raidos will be needed and even XM and Sirus expect it will be a year or more before they are out once the merger is approved. If they say a year, I say more like 2.

http://www.newsobserver.com/business/story/1014680.html


----------



## cartrivision

Ken S said:


> No, she's still on XM...or at least her channel is.


And whether or not she herself is there doesn't really matter. Her deal with XM called for her to provide about a total of 30 hours of content per year that was actually her. XM just stupidly paid her an outrageous sum of money so that they could say that they had "The Oprah Channel".... as if that was going to sell satellite radio subscriptions.


----------



## bmachia

I really want to have an Open mind here, but I cannot see any benefit to XM subscribers.

I've read the postings about gained Sport channels (i.e. Football), but I like to Watch Football, not listen, and plan my weekends around DirecTV during the game times. I often tune away when the radio announcer starts ranting their personal opinions, proving they cannot do their job with an objective view. Additionally, some announcers don't know how to describe events happening on the field and we, the listener, miss the action.

The argument of "Better value for my money" does not hold water, either. Time and time again, we see companies merge and a new billing structure appears. This new and Greater billing structure will have 1 maybe 2 packages costing less, but we will loose programming in the process. In order to hold-on-to (i.e. just keep) the programming we already have costs go up.

I have also read xmmerger.com, but I do not totally believe the words:
First, this was written before and Justice Department or Federal Communication Commission decisions and directions concerning the merger. Things will change from this initial posting.
Second, companies tend to lie. I seem to remember DirecTV articles stating there would be no additional costs for all the additional HD channels on DirecTV. But my bill will increase due to a snappy new HD channel package or the costs will stay the same with loss of programming that was initially free.

These were the arguments I submitted to the Federal Communications Commission when they asked for public comment. I can only hope they take some of my concerns into consideration. http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2417A1.pdf

My initial thoughts: I'll figure out a way to play my investment of MP3's in the car and drop Sat Radio in its entirety. This merger will not offer me anything I want, that I cannot get by other means.

Bill


----------



## Nick

*State Attorneys General Challenge Satellite Radio Merger *

The pending merger of XM and Sirius encountered a state-level challenge Thursday, with attorneys general in 11 states writing Federal Communications Commission Chairman Kevin Martin about their concerns with the deal.

The attorneys general letter sent Thursday took issue with the Justice Department decision handed down earlier in the week that gave the satellite radio companies its clearance to merger operations. ...

More @ www.skyfiles.com


----------



## sadmaker

Chuck W said:


> Lots of people once said that about satellite TV too. A merged company now can concentrate on the financials better and not outdoing one another by overspending. The sub numbers(MILLIONS) don't lie. IMO, sat radio will be around for a LONG time.


not the best analogy, as satellite tv(at least in its inception) was considered a less expensive alternative to cable... whereas satellite radio is a paid alternative to free radio.

i thought about sirius for a while, since they have the nfl station. then i signed up for the free internet trial and HEARD the nfl station:nono2:


----------



## Tom Servo

What would make this merger easier for both camps to swallow is if there were tons of bandwidth floating around on both platforms to allow for easy duplication. But unfortunately the NAB's talking point is right - neither service has any significant reserve bandwidth.

I can't speak for Sirius directly, but XM cuts off some channels when there's a lot of play-by-play sports channels active. I've _heard _Sirius has done the same thing for years.

If each provider is cutting off low rated channels to bring 20 sports games each, what makes anyone think they'll be able to add 20 of the competing service's channels?

Both providers have subpar sound quality as it is; adding more channels will only make that worse.

Ideally in my mind they'd have the bandwidth to duplicate just the sports channels & 'hot talk' until the interoperable radios become popular, but an interoperable radio may be 5 years off for all we know. (And yes, on another thread here, someone told me Uncle Mel has a working interoperable radio sitting on his desk. But who knows how long until they can actually put them out to mass market_!?_)

Right now I'm a pessimist and anti-merger, because one of the goals post merger will be reducing costs - by eliminating costs. And what better way to eliminate costs than to ditch XM's channels for the Sirius equivalent and vice versa? There's already worry over at The ViRUS (O&A's channel which has much fewer listeners than Stern's Howard 101) that they'll be a channel casualty along with some XM music channels.)

As has been obvious in this thread, people are very passionate for the most part for one service only. There are several channels on XM that, should they be replaced with Sirius dreck, will lead to my cancellation immedately.


----------



## Steve Mehs

> not the best analogy, as satellite tv(at least in its inception) was considered a less expensive alternative to cable... whereas satellite radio is a paid alternative to free radio.


Incorrect. Satellite was never viewed as an alternative to cable until the mid to later 90s. Satellite TV was a way to provide multichannel video to rural areas not served by cable. Primestar, the first minidish provider, who was purchased by DirecTV in 1999 was owned by Primestar Partners, a co-op of cable companies. Satellite radio was competition to terrestrial radio out of the gate, satellite TV wasn't considered competition to cable up until recently, relatively speaking.


----------



## Tom_S

sadmaker said:


> not the best analogy, as satellite tv(at least in its inception) was considered a less expensive alternative to cable... whereas satellite radio is a paid alternative to free radio.
> 
> i thought about sirius for a while, since they have the nfl station. then i signed up for the free internet trial and HEARD the nfl station:nono2:


Actually satellite TV was considered an expensive luxury item. Providing Digital quality with the use of expensive receivers. It took many years to get a customer base worthy of competition.

Satellite radio is in direct competition with terrestrial radio, but at the moment a very small competitor. Free rado has many competitors from Sat radio to MP3 players. They better get their act together.


----------



## djlong

Eliminating an XM channel doesn't save a lot of money. Cutting your marketing budget because you're not competing against "The Other Guy" save a metric buttload of money. Getting out of bidding wars for talent saves even more money.


----------



## James Long

Combining the marketing budget will help ... but nothing should be eliminated. They still have to make sales.


----------



## gregroberts

as an XM subscriber - one of the first in New England and an original tester on XM I am seriously disappointed with this

I wouldn't listen to Howard Stern for free let alone pay to not listen to him

the fact that Sirius has trouble paying Stern is not a good enough reason to destroy XM which was smart enough to tell him no in the first place

this is a dark day for XM Radio


----------



## gregroberts

listening to baseball or football on radio is much like listening to porn

whats the point?

In my opinion Sirius has inferior programming and too much baggage


----------



## djlong

Name a few things you like and I'm sure you'll find plenty of people who would say "what's the point?"


----------



## gregroberts

I always thought that half the fun of baseball and football was watching the play

you can always turn the volume off if you don't want to listen to John Madden and still enjoy the game


----------



## paulman182

gregroberts said:


> I always thought that half the fun of baseball and football was watching the play
> 
> you can always turn the volume off if you don't want to listen to John Madden and still enjoy the game


Watching it is probably more than half the fun, but there are times that you can't use a TV (like in the car) or the game is just not available to you on TV.


----------

