It's officially news: XM/SSR to merge.

If it's about broadcasting, radio, TV, satellite, cable, this is where to talk about it.

Moderators: The People's DJ, Arp2, Hoosier Daddy

Post Reply
SPIKE NESMITH!
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1276
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 6:52 am
Location: away over here.
Contact:

It's officially news: XM/SSR to merge.

Post by SPIKE NESMITH! » Mon Feb 19, 2007 3:06 pm

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070219/ap_ ... har7Cs0NUE

Please, FCC. Do the right thing for once. :evil:

SPIKE NESMITH!
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1276
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 6:52 am
Location: away over here.
Contact:

Post by SPIKE NESMITH! » Mon Feb 19, 2007 3:11 pm

update: http://xmradio.mediaroom.com/index.php? ... &item=1423
* Greater Programming and Content Choices -- The combined company is
committed to consumer choice, including offering consumers the ability
to pick and choose the channels and content they want on a more a la
carte basis. The combined company will also provide consumers with a
broader selection of content, including a wide range of commercial-free
music channels, exclusive and non-exclusive sports coverage, news,
talk, and entertainment programming. Together, XM and SIRIUS will be
able to improve on products such as real-time traffic and rear-seat
video and introduce new ones such as advanced data services including
enhanced traffic, weather and infotainment offerings.

* Accelerated Technological Innovation -- The merger will enable the
combined company to develop and introduce a wider range of lower cost,
easy-to-use, and multi-functional devices through efficiencies in chip
set and radio design and procurement. Such innovation is essential to
remaining competitive in the consumer electronics-driven world of audio
entertainment.

* Benefits to OEM and Retail Partners -- The combined company will offer
automakers and retailers the opportunity to provide a broader content
offering to their customers. Consumer electronics retailers, including
Best Buy, Circuit City, RadioShack, Wal-Mart and others, will benefit
from enhanced product offerings that should allow satellite radio to
compete more effectively.

* Enhanced Financial Performance -- This transaction will enhance the
long-term financial success of satellite radio by allowing the combined
company to better manage its costs through sales and marketing and
subscriber acquisition efficiencies, satellite fleet synergies, combined
R&D and other benefits from economies of scale. Wall Street equity
analysts have published estimates of the present value of cost synergies
ranging from $3 billion to $7 billion.

* More Competitive Audio Entertainment Provider -- The combination of an
enhanced programming lineup with improved technology, distribution and
financials will better position satellite radio to compete for
consumers' attention and entertainment dollars against a host of
products and services in the highly competitive and rapidly evolving
audio entertainment marketplace. In addition to existing competition
from free "over-the-air" AM and FM radio as well as iPods and mobile
phone streaming, satellite radio will face new challenges from the rapid
growth of HD Radio, Internet radio and next generation wireless
technologies.
This just in... subscribers to get dicked.

ap news alert
Member
Member
Posts: 154
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2004 7:35 pm
Location: Sod, WV

Post by ap news alert » Mon Feb 19, 2007 3:17 pm

The two satellite radio giants want to join
forces.
X-M Satellite Radio and Sirius Satellite Radio have announced
plans for a merger.
The joint announcement says X-M and Sirius shareholders will
each own approximately 50 percent of the combined company.
The companies said that Sirius C-E-O Mel Karmazin would be the
chief executive of the new company. X-M chairman Gary Parsons would
become chairman.
While analysts and company executives say it could result in
significant cost savings, the deal is certain to face tough
scrutiny from federal regulators. It has been the subject of
speculation for months.
The deal would bring together Howard Stern and NASCAR on Sirius
with X-M's Oprah Winfrey, Bob Dylan and Major League Baseball.

User avatar
Lee
Member
Member
Posts: 2374
Joined: Fri May 03, 2002 8:56 pm

Post by Lee » Mon Feb 19, 2007 3:18 pm

I wonder how this is going to affect those of us with Sirius or XM included with our satellite TV packages?

I don't listen to mine that much...
twitter.com/CrypticBullshit

User avatar
Arp2
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 5209
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 10:58 pm

Re: It's officially news: XM/SSR to merge.

Post by Arp2 » Mon Feb 19, 2007 3:22 pm

SPIKE NESMITH! wrote:Please, FCC. Do the right thing for once. :evil:
Indeed.
"I don't know the same things you don't know."

"Yes, you do; you just won't admit it!"


"Yeeee...it looks like a 'Belt Buckle & Ball Cap' convention in here......"

Bob Loblaw
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 5201
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2001 5:37 pm
Location: Over here

Post by Bob Loblaw » Mon Feb 19, 2007 3:58 pm

Sweet Stern & O&A working for the same company again....HA!

User avatar
Hoosier Daddy
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 7121
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2002 11:35 am
Location: Not 100% in love with your tone right now.

Post by Hoosier Daddy » Mon Feb 19, 2007 4:19 pm

So ... if approved, this would make SatRadio a monopoly?

:?
Translators are a Pox on the FM radio dial.

SPIKE NESMITH!
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1276
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 6:52 am
Location: away over here.
Contact:

Post by SPIKE NESMITH! » Mon Feb 19, 2007 4:27 pm

I can't see how it wouldn't, but you know they're going to pull the "b-b-but ipods! b-b-b-but terrestrial radio! b-b-b-but HD radio!" defence to get around it.

Within a year we'll see 'packages' like cable. "this one is $15 extra. this one is $23 extra. This one is $10 extra."
Greater Programming and Content Choices -- The combined company is
committed to consumer choice, including offering consumers the ability
to pick and choose the channels and content they want on a more a la
carte basis.
I've tried and tried and I can't find ANY way that this benefits anyone other than XM who were on the fast track to the toilet. It certainly doesn't benefit the subscribers.

User avatar
Lester
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 11703
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2001 5:47 pm
Location: Raleigh, NC
Contact:

Post by Lester » Mon Feb 19, 2007 4:34 pm

Hell, let it be a monopoly. There are plenty of terrestrial radio options to keep them in check.

AmpedNow
Member
Member
Posts: 4554
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2002 4:46 am
Location: none

Post by AmpedNow » Mon Feb 19, 2007 4:41 pm

Hoosier Daddy wrote:So ... if approved, this would make SatRadio a monopoly?

:?
They say no, because they already have stiff competition from terrestrial radio, iPods, and soon HD and internet radio.

I still think that there's enough room for two satrad providers, but the way these companies have burned through cash, the shareholders are demanding a return. A merge is the fastest way to do it.

The technology that got sadrad off the ground is nothing short of amazing. They had to create it, and because nobody has done it before, it was incredibly expensive to develop. They are still paying for it to this day.

The marketing and talent costs go without saying...

But the real question is: how do the dual subs decide which service to cut?

:P

sportsvoice
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1974
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2001 10:06 am
Location: O-H...

Post by sportsvoice » Mon Feb 19, 2007 5:24 pm

K-Rock wrote:
Hoosier Daddy wrote:So ... if approved, this would make SatRadio a monopoly?

:?
They say no, because they already have stiff competition from terrestrial radio, iPods, and soon HD and internet radio.

I still think that there's enough room for two satrad providers, but the way these companies have burned through cash, the shareholders are demanding a return. A merge is the fastest way to do it.

The technology that got sadrad off the ground is nothing short of amazing. They had to create it, and because nobody has done it before, it was incredibly expensive to develop. They are still paying for it to this day.

The marketing and talent costs go without saying...

But the real question is: how do the dual subs decide which service to cut?

:P
...and will I wind up having to replace the sat radios that I've already bought?

User avatar
soccerguy
Member
Member
Posts: 147
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2004 4:26 pm
Location: Charleston

Post by soccerguy » Mon Feb 19, 2007 5:42 pm

NAB's response......

NAB STATEMENT IN RESPONSE
TO SIRIUS/XM PROPOSED MERGER

WASHINGTON, DC - The following statement can be attributed to NAB Executive Vice President Dennis Wharton.

"Given the government's history of opposing monopolies in all forms, NAB would be shocked if federal regulators permitted a merger of XM and Sirius. It bears mentioning that regulators summarily rejected a similar monopoly merger of the nation's only two satellite television companies -- DirecTV and DISH Network -- just a few years back.

"When the FCC authorized satellite radio, it specifically found that the public would be served best by two competitive nationwide systems. Now, with their stock prices at rock bottom and their business model in disarray because of profligate spending practices, they seek a government bail-out to avoid competing in the marketplace.

"In coming weeks, policymakers will have to weigh whether an industry that makes Howard Stern its poster child should be rewarded with a monopoly platform for offensive programming. We’re hopeful that this anti-consumer proposal will be rejected."


Pretty standard stuff from them....interesting dig on Howard.

User avatar
Hoosier Daddy
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 7121
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2002 11:35 am
Location: Not 100% in love with your tone right now.

Post by Hoosier Daddy » Mon Feb 19, 2007 6:41 pm

webdesignguy wrote:Pretty standard stuff from them....interesting dig on Howard.
He jumped ship and now works for The Enemy.

8)
Translators are a Pox on the FM radio dial.

User avatar
Lester
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 11703
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2001 5:47 pm
Location: Raleigh, NC
Contact:

Post by Lester » Mon Feb 19, 2007 7:34 pm

So the NAB is against "censorship", except when they're for it?

SPIKE NESMITH!
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1276
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 6:52 am
Location: away over here.
Contact:

Post by SPIKE NESMITH! » Mon Feb 19, 2007 7:37 pm

<johnkerry>I voted to censor radio... BEFORE I voted not to.</johnkerry> :lol:

User avatar
Hoosier Daddy
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 7121
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2002 11:35 am
Location: Not 100% in love with your tone right now.

Post by Hoosier Daddy » Mon Feb 19, 2007 8:00 pm

Lester wrote:So the NAB is against "censorship", except when they're for it?
That would be correct, sir ...

:lol:
Translators are a Pox on the FM radio dial.

AmpedNow
Member
Member
Posts: 4554
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2002 4:46 am
Location: none

Post by AmpedNow » Mon Feb 19, 2007 10:28 pm

NAB STATEMENT IN RESPONSE
TO SIRIUS/XM PROPOSED MERGER

WASHINGTON, DC - The following statement can be attributed to NAB Executive Vice President Dennis Wharton.

..."When the FCC authorized satellite radio, it specifically found that the public would be served best by two competitive nationwide systems. Now, with their stock prices at rock bottom and their business model in disarray because of profligate spending practices, they seek a government bail-out to avoid competing in the marketplace.
You fucking hypocrite...

The NAB did everything they could to keep satellite radio from becoming a reality. It is they that run to Congress every time a potential competitor pops up to demand special protections from them, and kill them in the cradle if they can.

Since when do OTA broadcasters have a sole entitlement to the marketplace?

How about DBS subscribers who are forced into local markets and must get waivers for distant networks? Or cable blackouts of out of market channels? Is this not anti-consumer in favor of OTA interests?

And that is just one of many examples of anti-consumer, anti-competitive actions by the NAB.
"In coming weeks, policymakers will have to weigh whether an industry that makes Howard Stern its poster child should be rewarded with a monopoly platform for offensive programming. We’re hopeful that this anti-consumer proposal will be rejected."


You fucking hypocrite...

I'm sure that there is not one shread of indecent speech or profane words on any of your 12,000 stations.

If your organization had the guts to stand up to the FCC's morality crusade, there's a good chance that Howard would've never left for the "dark side"...

And to imply that the NAB never turned a blind eye towards "shock" radio is a lie.

:roll:

Bob Loblaw
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 5201
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2001 5:37 pm
Location: Over here

Post by Bob Loblaw » Tue Feb 20, 2007 12:14 am

Doesn't the FTC have more to do with this than the FCC?

User avatar
Mark Hallburn
Member
Member
Posts: 857
Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 4:30 pm
Location: Putnam County
Contact:

Post by Mark Hallburn » Tue Feb 20, 2007 12:26 am

This will take months to work out. But if they work it so consumers get the programming of both networks instead of only one, let the deal go through.
News For Putnam County
www.PutnamLIVE.com

User avatar
The Big Ear
Member
Member
Posts: 96
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2003 2:26 am

Post by The Big Ear » Thu Feb 22, 2007 1:51 am

Is there a study anywhere of how many channels of SAT radio a user typically listens to? Or any actual ratings for SAT channels? That would be VERY interesting to read.

The reason I haven't bought it (other than I'm cheap) is because I know I'd listen to about 3-5 stations with regularity and the other 100 stations would just sit, unused. That's a waste of cash so I don't need it.

I think the market it going to win out here and you'll see a smaller offering in the end from the combined company. They just can't sustain so many kinds of niche channels that nobody is listening to. Just like cable TV. We reached a peak at about 75 channels on the main tier before you pay even more... and most of us watch maybe 6 to 8 with any regularity.

Post Reply