Slashdot Mirror
XM And SIRIUS Radio Merging
lenny6998 writes to tell us Yahoo! News is reporting that XM and Sirius Radio, the only two major players in the relatively new market of subscription satellite radio have announced a merger. "The two companies said in a statement that Mel Karmazin, the CEO of Sirius, would become chief executive of the new company while Gary Parsons, the chairman of XM, would remain in that role."
Wonder when they will announce price increases?
I'm not a Troll, it's reverse psychology.
I would say that yes, they were. Some of them had exclusive contracts with say the NFL, or MLB. And who is going to shell out the money for both? A lot of their stations services overlap just like say cable TV and satellite TV.
There are many tongues to talk, and but few heads to think. -Victor Hugo
Not really, as they will still face competition from traditional radio.
I had XM for a few months -- loved it for about 15 days. Then I was too lazy to extricate myself from the deal, so I turned it over to a friend who travels over the road a lot.
Since I had that subscription, I realized that satellite radio -- like all "one size fits all" radio, is dead. Honestly. It may not actually have died yet, but the days are numbered.
I have a great MP3 collection at home -- running on a (yes, lame) Windows Media Center PC with a ton of storage. I also have a bunch of my favorite movies encoded both for highdef and lowdef. Why? Because I can now access everything I "own" remotely.
My phone is an HTC Trinity P3600 -- currently unavailable in the States as far as I know. With the Dopod 810 ROM, I am able to utilize T-Mobile's EDGE network to my advantage. If I want to listen to my MP3s, I do so remotely using that EDGE network. Often times I am able to get a sustained 200kbps download rate, which drops to about 80kbps in more remote areas. For most of my travel (nationwide), I am able to listen to my entire playlist without having to carry with me anything more than my PDA phone. It works great -- and I can plug my phone into my car stereo and listen to my tracks at will. I even created a nice interface for picking songs, and it works great. I pay one flat rate for my EDGE connection, and for an additional $20 a month I also get unlimited use of Starbuck's WiFi network, which works great when I am really in the boonies.
Will most people do this right now? No, because the costs are a bit too high, and most people aren't technically adept enough to set it up. Yet those days are coming to a close as more people are buying cell phones that aren't locked by the vendor (T-Mobile loves to lock great features out of their cell phones, so I buy mine on the grey market). I've seen alpha versions of bittorrent-protocol software that runs on Windows Mobile, and I'm sure more is on its way for other phone/portable OSes. As this happens, we will soon see peer-to-peer "radio" stations taking over and giving the consumer what they REALLY want.
I'm sure that XM and SIRIUS will be watched closely by the "evil" FCC, but no matter what happens, their days/years ARE numbered. Regular radio is having a huge problem attracting advertisers, because the new generation now has iPods. The iPod is a great device, but it is limited to only what you brought from home.
If Microsoft wants to kill Apple, all they need to do is come up with an iPod-like player that has EDGE/GPRS connectivity, and offer people music-by-the-song or MP3-over-the-air accessibility. Imagine what will happen to the "broadcast" market when the unicast market can destroy it at any time?
A more interesting merger than XM and SIRIUS, is really now Howard Stern and Opie & Anthony being on the same network.
Can one satellite network handle two (well three) giant egos.
Let's find out.
-Teiresias
We already covered the FCC saying no. http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/01/2 2/2237249
Methinks it's time to buy a telescope to watch them merge the satellite!
Be relentless!
Not all monopolies are bad. Some result in the best product, even considering price, for the consumer.
There are many tongues to talk, and but few heads to think. -Victor Hugo
XM and Sirius have never been profitable. They have both lost hundreds of millions of dollars since their inception. So what good is a merger?
I'm sorry, I just spit my coffee out across my screen.
I read the internet for the articles.
Are they going to consolidate the music stations? Offer identical options on both sets of hardware or keep things seperate but merge the overhead?
One of the reasons I picked Sirius was the music selection on the channels appealed to me more then on XM. Am I going to loose out now?
This has been talked about before but I've never heard what will actually change for the end user.
It might be nice to have some sort of Satellite Radio standard. So that you can buy a receiver then someday choose a provider, instead of everything being proprietary. Maybe it will lead to them offering some channels for free, and a subscription for others. I would listen to free satellite radio even if it had commercials. When you drive a couple hours in the same direction you're bound to lose signal and have to find another station, not so with satellite.
that the name of the merged company isn't iSatellite radio....
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
As a huge O&A/Ron & Fez fan, I hope that the new company gets rid of some of the redundant stations (do we need 4 Top 20 stations?) and allocate more bandwidth to new stations. Maybe the Hideout boys and Ron & Fez get their own station while The Virus goes 24/7 O&A. Every time Ron and Fez mention "big things" for their show, ELo (Eric Logan) mentions the bandwidth issue.
Also, as a Big XII Alumni (Baylor,) hopefully they'll give us an option to start listening to Sirius content on XM. Oh, and there is that little league called the NFL.
I'm also curious to see how Opie and Anthony live working umnder the same umbrella as Howard Stern. Time will tell.
What, me Tweet?
Exactly. Monopolies in and of themselves are not illegal. Antitrust laws make it unlawful to maintain or attempt to create a monopoly through tactics that either unreasonably exclude firms from the market, or significantly impair their ability to compete.
I bet they now regret cooking up their own incompatible proprietary broadcast protocols to lock their service to the equipment.
There is such a thing as open standards.
Evil people are out to get you.
Or the addition of commercials? I've never subscribed to either, but I thought one of the services still ran commercials (maybe it's Sirius because I think Stern reads them on-air) even though you were paying money for them.
It will be interesting to see if the non-commercial-running service stays that way.
I'll create an amusing sig when I have something meaningful to post.
I was wondering about that too. They either are so desperate for a merger that they'll take their chances with the FCC, or they've already talked with Martin and convinced him that it won't be anticompetitive.
Who knows, they may succeed in framing the competition issue as one applying to the streamed audio market, which encompasses radio, Internet radio, and sat radio. When discussing broadband, the FCC frequently defines the market rather broadly, incorporating dish access into the discussion, as if it is a serious market participant. Given their generally broad interpretation of communications markets, they (or at least Martin, Tate, and McDowell) may buy the argument.
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
The thing everyone forgets is that monopoly isn't the problem: it's the abuse of monopoly to unfairly control a market.
XM and Sirius have so far both struggled for customers for several reasons, not the least of which being problems of customer awareness. Many people simply don't know - and won't learn without extensive research - which network would be better for them (in terms of content, quality and price). People are used to having one radio "network", expecting competitors to just be different channels. The idea of two separate networks with non-interoperable hardware just isn't what people want.
The question is how this new hybrid company (I love the AT&T joke...) will shape its new business model: if no other satellite companies emerge, will they offer channels 'for rent' to other content providers? Will they continue to own all channels? Etc.
"Stumble before you crawl"
That will happen as soon at the government OKs the deal. The OK happens when some politicians are given brib^H^H^H^H campaign contributions. Capitalism at its finest!!!
General, you are listening to a machine! Do the world a favor and don't act like one.
You linked the word "monopolies" to the Wikipedia article "Natural monopoly". I dispute that broadcasting has to be a natural monopoly. In fact, the structure of broadcast licensing in the United States ensures that music radio broadcasting is a coercive monopoly. This is due to the FCC's foot-dragging on low-power FM station licensing, bought and paid for in part by XM investor Clear Channel Communications and by National Public Radio.
All Corporations Merge Into OmniCorp
Saturday, Jan 1, 2000
UNITED NATIONS - In a multimedia press conference held Friday at the U.N., top executives from the world's three remaining corporations announced a final merger, uniting the planet's financial resources under the newly created OmniCorp.
Under the terms of the record $9.2 quadrillion merger, the Global Tetrahedron Conglomerate gains controlling shares of its two final competitors, Time-WarTurABCDis-SonylumbiaAT&T and GM-LockheedZweibSKGBank, creating what company spokespersons called "an unstoppable juggernaut wielding unparalleled wealth and power."
As a cost-saving measure, dealmakers also negotiated the absorption of all world governments into OmniCorp, making the corporate behemoth the sole ruler of mankind.
"We stand at the close of a century of progress and at a dawn of a new millennium," said OmniCorp spokesperson Ed Rohl. "One hundred years ago, the average working Joe was at the mercy of the big corporate trusts. Now, as a new century looms, we can celebrate just how far we have come."
Key members of OmniCorp's board of directors, including Walt Disney, were cryogenically unfrozen and revived by a team of shadow-government technicians. They are expected to assume overlord duties as early as Thursday.
My blog
>The iPod is a great device, but it is limited to only what you brought from home.
What happens when you have every song ever released digitally on your iPod?
A work that expires before its copyright never enters the public domain and thus enjoys eternal copyright protection.
XM definitely does commercials on some stations. Usually pretty lame ones...Highly amusing what they seem to think their demographic is.
ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
Remember "PayTV"?
Back in the day here in Canada, the first cable companies called their service "PayTV", no commercials.
It was advertised that commercials were necessary for each network to pay for their broadcasting charges in maintaining towers and whatnot.
But soon enough, they saw money.
And the same will happen to Satellite Radio.
I've always liked XM better than Sirius for their indie and alternative channels. (I think sirius only has one named alt nation?) When I bought my 2007 BMW they wanted $600 to integrate Sirius. No XM was offered. I declined and instead opted for the $50 XM roady xt aftermarket. If this goes through how soon would auto makers offer the hybrid service? Right now GM and a few others offer XM while most imports offer Sirius. It would suck to buy a 2008 car and be locked into only one side's hardware.
There's no problem with some monopolies. Major league sports for one example. MLB is a monopoly. So what?
Apparently the same can be said with satellite radio: both companies are reporting losses. The market has spoken and the market has said "well, some of us want satellite radio, but not enough to warrant two seperate companies."
We now have another monopoly with little chance of any kind of alternative as the barrier to entry is so high. I trust this means that there will be less content available than ever before. You'll only hear what's "popular" (ie. what they want you to buy this week). I'm just waiting for ClearChannel to buy the new company. Fortunately the only experience I've ever had with satellite radio is via DirecTV (another near monopoly that's hard to avoid if your local cable outlet sucks ass). Before they started touting their affiliation with XM, DirecTV used to have some "Digital Radio" channels. They were actually pretty good. Then the XP partnership happened and those channels were replaced with godawful crap.
My wife used to love the 80s music channel they had under the old system. But now they replaced that with "Ethel" or "Fred" or somesuch, and it sucks ass. The selection isn't as good as it used to be. And invariably they wind up throwing in stuff that doesn't even fit. The "80s" channel they have now has a "wider" definition (ie. only what they consider to be 80s instead of what was REALLY definitive 80s) of 80s in that it doesn't just feature punk and new wave stuff like the old one. Now they throw in all sorts of things (some of which aren't even 80s) that are vaguely "alternative" with the occasional crap country song thrown in. My guess is that since country is such a popular format (even though it sucks ass in my opinion) they are hoping that by dropping in an occasional tune, they might get some new buyers from people on the fence.
Yet another annoying factor is that the old system used to tell you on screen what was currently playing and which album it was from. It was very informative. The new system just gives you a little info and 90% of the time it's completely wrong. If that's what XM is like, then they can shove it. I hope they die a spectacular death because music lovers don't want satellite or subscription radio. Music lovers want a smörgåsbord of endless new and old music that is either thrown in as a "freebie" or totally free. And if the selection is varied enough, THEN and ONLY THEN will the music lover plunk down the cash for the goods. That's the way I roll. I listen to college radio and the BBC via the net (and I'm approaching 40) because in many markets it's the only place to hear good new music. If it's good enough, I check and see if eMusic has it and download it. If not, then I get it from Amazon on CD. Satellite radio is only for boring old people who still think Cadillacs are cool looking cars or who think they're being radical when they buy a modern Volkswagen Beetle. LastFM is about the only other option, but I fear that it will be pounced on by the big players and hence ruined once they reach a certain critical mass.
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
As a Sirius subscriber, I'm a bit worried what a merger, if approved, might bring. They mention a more a la carte selection of channels. I read this as "tiered" pricing. If I had to guess, it sounds like it will be more modeled after the pay-for-tv pricing...i.e. you get a basic package for x dollars, a premium packages for y dollars, oh and you want the sports package? thats an extra z dollars. If it goes that route, I'm really going to have to reconsider if it is really worth it to me. Overall I've been happy with the Sirius service and choice of programming they've had. All for one price keeps it simple and affordable. Any changes to that, which are bound to happen in a merger like this, chances are the consumer loses.
Art will introduce us to the shadow people, then Stern will ask them to show us their boobs.
Turns on trusty shortwave radio...
Holy crap a revolution! I get my radio for FREEEEEE!
crazy dynamite monkey
Both services have commercial-free stations. With XM (my preferred service) the stations actually run by XM are commercial-free. There are plenty of other stations run by outside sources (News, Talk, some music) which have advertising in order to sync properly with their original broadcast source.
XM has always had ads. The talk radio programs are sold to AM, FM, and XM stations, and as such have gaps for ads. There's no way around this other than pre-taping the shows (which I would actually prefer). As such, the talk stations have just as many ads as a regular station.
Clearchannel recently forced XM to put ads in their music stations as well, so some of the music stations have ads (although there are generally clone stations that do not).
I love listening to Bill O'Reilly and hearing Viagra commercials every other break.
Will this merger affect my Playboy Radio? I mean I signed up to XM in the first place for it, and when they cancelled it, I cancelled my subscription... Now Sirus has it, I worry about if it will be dropped again...
Got to love Playboy radio...
3 degrees of separation from Vladimir Putin
Its clear that XM and Sirius were in competition for a limited market. The iPod in the end was what brought these two together. XM and Sirius had a small window before cars started installing adapters for iPods. Since almost everyone who listens to music has a iPod, it meant that the benefits of satellite radio where lost when you could just plug in your iPod.
Whereas the two radio networks were counting on subscriptions continuing to increase each year for the next 4 years, in reality, they started leveling off this year. And now they have a business model based on a subscription base neither is likely to meet.
As a result, I think we'll see one of two things out of the new company. Either a substantial rate increase or a substantial content decrease. At any rate, its unlikely that the new company will have the variety of content that we see on both today.
Gotta disagree--the free 3 months of XM in my car got me hooked, and after I had it for a while my wife *had* to have it. We both have long commutes, and having the selection it offers is well worth the money to us. It's like cable tv--I'm not paying for commercial free so much as paying for selection.
Ever since I was a small boy trying to get the FM reception just right, I've always wanted to pay for radio.
Not just listen to advertisements, That's not enough of a contribution.
Oh, and I wanted it to sound like it was in a box, with lots of neat clipping and compression artifacts, instead of free fuzzy fm frequencies.
sometimes, nothing.
Yahoo! News is not a news agency. They have no reporters. They have a license to publish news reported by various news agencies, such as the AP, Reuters, NYT, etc.
This particular article was reported by AP Business (Seth Sutel). The page even has the Associated Press logo at the top right.
Not very difficult.
You've never had either service, have you? I don't know a single person who has tried satellite radio who has stopped subscribing. If it ever goes away, I will miss it forever.
Being a monopoly does not necessarily mean all of its behavior is monopolistic. Uncompetitive behavior by a monopoly can sometimes be illegal and bad. Being a monopoly is not illegal or even necessarily bad.
Speak truth to power.
But that also works in the opposite direction. Since they both wanted exclusive contracts, then the NFL was able to charge a premium. Now that they can't get the two companies into a bidding war, the price should go down.
The talk stations on both brands have commercials. XM has four or five music stations which are run by ClearChannel and have commercials. Those stations pretty much just waste bandwidth, as XM has there own commercial free equivalents to the ClearChannel stations.
Its called, when I get in my car I want to listen to music ... not 47 car commercials, 2 ads for viagra, 6 plugs for the station I am already listening to, and 5 clips from songs that I would rather be listening to.
I have little patience for advertisements. I would rather pay for XM / Sirius then listen to that crap. Not to mention, look at how many more channels you get.
I am gonna take a guess that you either have no or only basic cable. I personally have full cable with 3 premium channels. (too expensive to have all 5) I don't see any difference between getting cable and getting satellite radio.
Yes, most cable channels have advertisements but I spend 80% of my time watching channels that are in HD. (For the most part, HBO, Showtime and Starz)
If I could pay more for cable that doesn't have advertisements, you better believe I would order it right away.
until (succeed) try { again(); }
We now have another monopoly with little chance of any kind of alternative as the barrier to entry is so high.
In both a literal and figurative sense.
Table-ized A.I.
I hope that they retain the XM name. It's fitting.
[%] Cingular Ringtones
Wonder when they will announce price increases?
Considering their combined install base is still a fraction of what it could be, I doubt the price of a subscription will go up any time soon. They're still trying to attract customers after all. They're also trying to hold on to the customers they do have, many of whom are somewhat lukewarm-- I couldn't quote the numbers but I know that a large perentage of new subscribers are new car buyers (meaning satellite comes with the car, and the buyer says "what the hell, I'll subscribe." ) That's not exactly a fanatical base who will stick by any price increase.
Additionally, their competition was never just "each other." They may now be the only satellite radio game in town, but they still have to compete with free AM and FM as well as those who would just listen to their iPod.
AM radio? Where does Clear Channel fit in? They must have a hand in this.
What?
Howard Stern /and/ Oprah?
I fucking quit.
I signed up for XM a few years back, when the portable myFi first came out. I had to sign a one year contract, and in return, got the player for free after rebates. As soon as the year was up, I cancelled. Reception was non-existant when on campus, which was the reason I got it - to have music to listen to in between classes. All I could do was record 5 hours of programming ahead of time. If i am going to listen to pre-recorded music, I'd rather do it on my iPod, which replaced my XM service. I would never go back to paying for satellite radio.
Great, so Fred and Fungus (my favorite XM stations) will probably be shitcanned in favor of the inferior counterparts on Sirious. Isn't that how these mergers work? Pay more, get less!
To paraphrase: Howard Stern and Rush Limbaugh should be enough variety for everybody.
What?
I was listening to a religious program about purity when there was an add for an "adult only" vacation.
Somewhat disappointing I must say.
My email to the station got me signed up as "a valued listener".
Hmm... something missing here.
For the price of Sirius, I can buy a CD a month. In 4 months, I have a bigger variety then what they play anyhow.
You call it commercial free, I and others dont. Having Ad's for the other channels and brain-dead DJ banter makes the "commercial free" channels not what most people on the planet call commercial free.
I call commercial free nothing but song after song with no DJ talking in between songs or ad's for the other channels.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
There are commercials on the talk and news stations, etc. I believe both Sirius and XM have commercial free music stations though (although XM at least has 4 or 5 channels that are programmed by Clear Channel, and have commercials....... it doesn't affect me though, since the whole reason I got XM was to avoid radio stations programmed by Clear Channel).
Just like fountain pens compete with pencils, right?
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
The problem is (as mentioned elsewhere here): What exactly counts as 'competition'?
Just because they're the only two satellite radio stations doesn't mean they can't lose out to ipod+car adapters, or FM radio, or whatever. Maybe they need a monopoly in satellite radio to survive? I'm sure more than a few buyers never bought into either one because they couldn't decide which was best or offered what they wanted more.
Pain lasts, kid. Its how you know you're alive. Sometimes I think this growing up thing is just pain management-TheMaxx
Thanks heavens I haven't heard any ads on XM since I subscribed 3 years ago. Of course I mainly listen to channels like XM Chill which is one hell of a great station. Guess maybe they were required to put ads in the pop stations? That would make sense since the songs themselves can often be considered ads.
Read your contract! The "lifetime" part of the subscription only applies to your receiver not you.
Really? My life does not revolve around finding new music and programming it into my iPod. I listen to Sat Radio so I don't have to do that. Plus, I get comedy, talk, and a lot of other programming that have no or less ads.
Not all of us are tied to our iPods by our nose.
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
Now there's a satellite radio monopoly. That monopoly has competition in terrestrial radio, but that hasn't improved terrestrial radio's quality, because satellite receivers are rare and expensive compared to terrestrial radio.
I wonder what would happen if the satellite network were unbundled from the content, and every media player mobile phone could receive satellite signals.
--
make install -not war
I subscribe to Sirius because it takes the work out of finding new music. I can put on a station that I like, tag the songs I especially like, and then every so often, download a track or buy a CD from one of the artists I found.
Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
Neither of these companies is particularly profitable (if at all). It won't be considered a monopoly by the SEC because of terrestrial (FM & AM) radio and this will result in lowering costs in two ways. First and foremost, the advertising and overhead budgets will be lower than the companies as they were separate. Secondly, duplicative channels will be combined into one.
This will probably not result in lower prices for the consumer, but it will (or at least should) result in profits for their investors.
MEF
I was listening to a religious program about purity when there was an add for an "adult only" vacation.
Somewhat disappointing I must say
You're lucky the ad wasn't for a Mediterranean cruise featuring male prostitutes, methamphetamine, and only the most supple choir/altar boys. After all, we do understand the religious demographic very well, notwithstanding the image they'd rather be associated with.
Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
As well as internet radio, Ipods/MP3 players, etc.
Umm... isn't the SEC going to say something about this?
+5, Truth
Gee, that's all so fascinating to know.
Advice: on VPS providers
Yeah, it's weird. I suspect that they will attempt to appease the FCC somehow. Maybe by renting out space on their network?
Back the truck up, kids.
This deal has to get by regulators first. More than one government organization is going to have a problem with these two heavy hitters creating a virtual monopoly in a sparsely-populated communications medium. I have to say I'd be disappointed if this deal passed. Competition is what makes corporations fight for our business. Without it, they've got no incentive to improve.
You're gonna get 15 MORE crappy pop channels, and reduced bandwidth. Just you wait and see.
Couldn't agree more. I was commuting 70 miles per day when I first tried it out. I got a portable XM radio and installed it in my car. Completely changed my drive. I bought a Chrysler in 2006 that had a Sirius radio built in, but instead, upgraded the radio to a Pioneer unit with XM, along with heavier speakers. While the XM portion didn't have all the features of the portable, I love having a non-commercial alternatives and other great stuff like MLB baseball.
Some think sat radio may not last, and I'm afraid I'm in that camp too. I do believe they will top out on the number of subscribers. The merger probably won't happen, because FCC rules prevent such a mergeer from taking place. They may change, but don't hold your breath.
== First cross river, then insult alligator.
Just because Mel Karmazin and others want to merge with XM, doesn't mean it's going to happen.
Recall what happened when Dish Network tried to buy DirectTV? It went on for a year, before regulators shut it down-so if I were you, I wouldn't be concerned at this time.
Just because you get modded "insightful" on Slashdot doesn't mean you actually are in real life.
I thought XM re-broadcast Clearchannel content? Where did you think all of those advertisements were coming from? http://www.fool.com/investing/high-growth/2006/03/ 10/xm-the-sounds-of-salesmen.aspx
http://www.orbitcast.com/archives/xm-canada-dumps- clear-channel-content.html
And anyway, ClearChannel is dumping stations as well.
http://www.clearchannel.com/Corporate/PressRelease .aspx?PressReleaseID=1825
"Clear Channel Announces Plan to Sell Radio Stations Outside the Top 100 Markets and Entire Television Station Group
SAN ANTONIO - November 16, 2006 - Clear Channel Communications, Inc. (NYSE:CCU) today announced plans to sell 448 of its 1,150 radio stations, all located outside the top 100 U.S. media markets, as well as the company's 42-station Television Group. Collectively, these properties contributed less than 10 percent of the company's revenues last year.
"
I read on the Speex mailing list a XM developer was testing the audio codec
& google uses it for gtalk too and it works for free like beer for everyone
Bandwidth and programming are cheap. Client acquisition costs, administrative staff, offices, insurance, programming development and infrastructure costs are where merged companies find savings. IMHO they'll find savings in reducing overhead, not programming.
I don't pay for the service and I still don't use it.
I drive a ZipCar which provides satellite radio as part of my rental. I'm not sure which service (I think XM). I tried it for a while, but decided that free radio played what I wanted to hear more predictably. It could have been the user interface. The receiver in the ZipCar does not easily store my preferred stations and allow me to skip to the next station if I didn't like the song that was on.
You want real anti-trust laws? Stop punishing companies for attaining a position that our laws encourage, and have fair formulaic restrictions on mergers to begin with - like any merger which would make you largest competitor in any given field is barred. So you're saying that nobody could merge their way up to a point where they'd be bigger than the biggest entity in the markeyt? Sounds like you're trying to protect the biggest entity there. Perhaps you meant that the biggest player shouldn't be allowed to merge with anyone, in which case a market with one 30% player and fourteen 5% player could see the 5% players merge into a 70% and crush the "big guy"? None of this adequately addresses one company not buying their competitor, but subtly undercutting him and taking his customers, driving him out of business. No, you need to read a little more about the history of trusts and monopolies. There is no magic "formula" that'll let you determine a "good" merger from a "bad" one. The best they can do is analyze on a case-by-case basis, as they have since 1890.
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
I have Sirius and one of the things that's always bugged me just a little bit is that I can get great NFL coverage on Sirius but zero MLB coverage. Sure, I could buy an XM subscription, but that requires two radios, two bills, and a whole lot of stuff in my car.
With the two merging, the combined service will have nearly all sports covered -- football (college and pro), hockey, Futbol (Soccer) domestic and international, NASCAR, Formula-1, NBA, etc. It will be really nice. No Curling, Underwater Basket Weaving, or Breast Bongos, alas.
BTW, I'm all for the new service to be called "S(e)XM"
If Nalgene water bottles are outlawed, only outlaws will have Nalgene water bottles.
Yes, FM may have a large library, but what good is it if they have unimaginative program directors who maintain limited playlists?
When FM radio abandoned the wonderful idea of letting on-air deejays play whatever the hell they liked, they lost my interest.
I love my mp3 player, but no matter how big the storage, I know what I've got, even with thousands of songs and shuffle. The beauty of radio is that you can be surprised. I would trade the knowledge that I will like everything I'm going to hear for the excitement of the occasional wonderful obscurity or cut from a musician I've never heard before.
Before I grew a wife and daughter, I used to go to sleep with the local "underground"(!) FM station, NPR (when they still played music) or one of the TWO (!) classical stations we used to have here in Chicago playing softly. Once in a while I'd be wakened from a sound, stoned sleep because some stunning, unexpected bit of beauty was coming over the airwaves. Those experiences nurtured a lasting, ever-young love of music and of the unexpected. Even after the underground station morphed into a common "adult-oriented rock" format and one of the two great classical stations went out of business (WNIB) and I grew out of my fascination with cannabis, I will still occasionally give the micro-SD that goes into my mp3 (Sandisk) player to a friend onto which to put something he/she likes. The thrill of hearing something fresh and/or surprising gets my head up even better than the weed used to, with the added benefit of not finding empty ice cream or Entenmann's cartons on the coffee table in the morning.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Well, I should have known something was up. A number of channels disappeared a few days back. Including my favorite station 67 which I listened to 90% of the time.
Frankly, my wife never liked the country stations. And that was the one station I listened too so the value of Sirius for me has become pretty low. Maybe they will replace it after the merger. A few other shows I like are on XM. So maybe we'll get those too.
I guess I can only hope...
Agreed.
:)
I usually use my iPod at work and when travelling in vehicles OTHER than my car (like on airplanes)
At home, I usually listen to streamed internet radio. These streams would be XM if they were easier to play under Linux (it's possible, but it's a pain but doesn't work too well)
In my car - XM all the way, it lets me know what to fill my iPod with.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
they'll combine all the great sports programming and both types of subscribers will get it all.
Personally, I signed up for XM because of the NHL programming (and the talk radio channels) but now I'm afraid I'll have to pay MORE just to get what I ORIGINALLY signed up for.
If they pull some sort of tiered pricing scheme for sports programming out of their collective asses, my subscription will be canceled faster than you can say, "Kiss my ass, Oprah and Friends".
Where the hell did you get a 1 MHz channel spacing for FM?
The FM broadcast band I know has a 200 kHz channel spacing, admittedly with certain limitations on the geographic locations of transmitters on adjacent channels, but even if you left half of the allocated channels unused, that's a 400 kHz spacing, not 1 MHz.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
You mention "Fred" which is XM and then you say "If that's what XM is like...". You just made this crap up didn't you?
Linky, plz.
Thx.
qz
What are you talking about? $12.95/mo will not buy you a NEW CD. Sure, you might get ONE used one, or some piece of crap from the bargain bin. But suggesting that you have more variety than Sirius is just ridiculous. By all means, if you don't want to subscribe, then don't. But don't pretend that it's expensive or that the music selection isn't fantastic as the reason that you don't subscribe.
I wonder if Dish network will carry XM stations (they carry Sirius' music stations now). Also I listen to it a lot at home. chans 6,7,8,9,12,14,15,16,18,21,22 and a few others.
If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people
For the price of Sirius, I can buy a CD a month. In 4 months, I have a bigger variety then what they play anyhow.
Obviously not a recent release.
Then there's the question of how you know what to buy. I live in one of the 10 largest cities in the U.S. and there is no jazz station on the radio. A local college station plays a few hours of jazz a week, but that's it. If I want to hear new jazz, I have two choices:
1) Go to a B&N once a week and rummage through the CDs, looking for new CDs.
2) Buy a subscription to Sirius or XM, which in my case is XM since that's the radio that came standard in my vehicle.
Without the 2nd Amendment, the others are just suggestions.
Sirius does not run commercials on its all-music channels. Most of the talk channels have commercials, especially if it is a simulcast of an AM/FM broadcast (e.g. NFL games). Stern has commercials, but they are far fewer than when he was on FM. Consider that he and his crew cannot sit and talk for 4-5 hours without bio-breaks. Much different than queueing up a playlist on a music channel.
In general, the variety of choices cannot be found in any one traditional geographic market.
There are features that you just don't get in your typical terrestrial radios. My favorite feature is pause. With the lower-end models, you get a 45min.+ sliding buffer to record. So, if I'm listening and have to run to the bathroom, or even fetch breakfast, I can come back and resume listening. You can then skip forward or back through your recorded buffer. Higher end models have 3hrs+ recording with permanent memory. They also have a portable unit akin to an ipod.
"No matter where you go, there you are." -- Buckaroo Banzai
XM has commercials on all stations.
This is incorrect. XM apparently has commercials on the talk channels. I don't listen to the talk channels, so I can't confirm. XM has no commercials on their own music channels. There are limited commercials on the stations provided by Clear Channel.
Without the 2nd Amendment, the others are just suggestions.
huh? What you call commercial free is called shuffle on your ipod. The XM Stations with DJ's are great.. They don't waste much time but it is nice to hear what they're thinking as they are playing their tracks.
Well... it was canadian priced, Sirius. Worked out to like $17 a month, which will buy 1 to 2 cd's from Futureshop depending on the deal of the day.
My commute was at the time, 2 hours a day. This translated into a LOT of time listening to my 4 or 5 stations that I liked. After 4 or 5 months, I started to get sick of the music. I felt that they were playing such a small sample of the music that is out there, that I felt ripped off paying for it. I don't know the real number, but it seemed that they had only 20 or so songs per station. I would hear the same song 3 or 4 times a day. Sorry, don't feel like paying for that.
You are right though, hearing new music was definitely a bonus, there was just not enough variety.
But then I found a different source of music and don't need broadcasters anymore, specifically broadcasters that charge the price of a CD per month.
But I get the feeling that I'm in the minority and that most people just want to listen to their favorite 20 songs over and over again (thank you iPod). I suspect satellite radio will evolve into something much closer to what you hear on your FM dial... promoted music and commercials. By then, why bother!
Seriously. Watch CNBC. Someone will say something like that very soon.
I scream. You scream. I assume that means we're both acquainted with the problem. We proceed.
here
or here
Well, it didn't work so well when one terrestrial company tried to contain the three of them. WNEW had them all at once, and O&A were treated as the little stepbrothers who were slapped with gag orders and so on regarding talking about Howard. I foresee tension in the Force.
Being on satellite radio they should both be able to escalate their disputes, whatever they might be, to whatever level the market will bear. With the FCC, it's more of a somebody has to be dominant thing because they're limited in the level to which their disputes rise. I'd be surprised if any of it were sincere anyway.
For an intelligent though still irreverent radio show, get the podcasts of Penn Jillette's show.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Disappointed in the "purity" or the opportunity to get away for a wild and sexy weekend at our tropical paradise, meeting other swingers who share common interests in our exclusive outdoor activities such as, nude ping-pong, orgy scuba diving, pot-luck couple swap, pin the tail with the donkey (don't ask), and much much more!
Which one was disappointing?
Authority questions you. Return the favor.
How hard would it be to build a dual-protocol receiver now that they're merged?
I'm sure you're right, that's exactly what they'll do. The temptation is going to be very strong to get rid of the redundant bandwidth and chipsets in the not too distant future, leaving lots of stranded customers (on the XM side, I'd guess) before too long. Maybe they'll do something for them, but if it's integrated into the car that's going to be interesting.
I've been avoiding the whole area for this reason - I'd still rather see them go MPEG-4 or something, but a defacto standard is at least better than no standard.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Really? My life does not revolve around finding new music and programming it into my iPod. I listen to Sat Radio so I don't have to do that. Plus, I get comedy, talk, and a lot of other programming that have no or less ads.
You've got two things here that aren't necessarily coupled. You could alternately subscribe to a service that made podcasts of pre-determined media that got downloaded to your iPod so you wouldn't have to do it. Slightly larger capacity and residential internet speeds would be helpful to fulfill this model, but that's coming. This would be good for people with your programming preferences who can't get good reception of satellite radio.
Not all of us are tied to our iPods by our nose.
Ah, personal issues with iPods then?
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Nonsense. Satellite radio is uncensored, and it offers the opportunity to hear new things not in your library. Commercial radio can do the latter, but not the former. Your iPod can do the former, but not the latter. Satellite radio doesn't devolve into religious MUSH every Sunday; commercial radio does. Satellite radio offers more to rural areas in terms of choice than they ever had previously. The digital nature of the format makes for very high quality, *especially* for fixed receivers like my Sirius at home. And - at least at the moment - satellite radio doesn't sandwich music between a series of lame, lowest common denominator commercials. Finally, satellite radio has a HECK of a lot more variety than does commercial radio. Even in an urban area.
As far as I'm concerned, Sirius is the best thing ever to happen to broadcast radio. Regardless of where it is broadcast from. I used to subscribe to XM, but after way too many playings of Bob Dylan's folk music in the middle of what they said was a classic rock station, I pulled the plug. There's only so much nasal whining I can take. I'm much happier with Sirius's Buzzsaw and Octane and their neighbors. As for our local FM station... ugh. The farm report. Brittney's shaved her head. Trump is arguing with Rosie. A mix of country and pop. Makes me throw up in my mouth a little just to think about it.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Aren't Sirius and XM the two only providers of satellite radio? I mean, how in the heck is this going to get past anti-trust regulations and the SEC monopoly look-outs?
To my knowledge, Sirius and XM are the only providers of satellite radio. Is DXM the same thing?
Also, if they are not the only providers of satellite radio, then wouldn't the combined market share of the two merged companies put them at risk for anti-trust any monopoly violations?
Knowing Google's lust for data collection, the Soviet Union is still alive and well inside the psyche of Sergey Brin....
That's still commercials, even if it's limited to channels provided by Clear Channel. Sirius only has them on the talk stations, the music stations are completely commercial free. The fact that Clear Channel is involved with XM is enough reason for me to stay away, another reason this merger I'm not too found of this merger. I just received my own Sirius unit this holiday (we've had one at work since the service started) and if Clear Channel starts to get a say in the programming of the stations, I'll be canceling my account. The metal station Sirius has now is actually pretty good, and plays a lot of hardcore and I don't want to lose the quality programming that could easily happen if Clear Channel gets a say.
rm -rf
XM rebroadcasts SOME ClearChannel content. Those are the channels I don't listen to.
Without the 2nd Amendment, the others are just suggestions.
[Obscure reference only for Sirius Stern fans. The rest of you folks just go back to your knitting...]
The last time I wrote code, it was Morse
I predict about 18-20.95 a month now. I like XM; hope they keep their music selection. I would warn people from signing up for those long contracts and do month-to-month in case they merge and do something wacky like every other merger does to their customer base.
I'm not sure what you mean. XM and Sirius were in bidding wars over the leagues, not the other way around. They were in direct competition for the athletic content. So indeed the NFL was able to charge a premium. And you are right the price will go down. But I don't see how your statement shows that the two satellite providers weren't in competition.
There are many tongues to talk, and but few heads to think. -Victor Hugo
Now hold on a damn second. The FCC already said no just a few weeks ago when these rumors started. So what's changed? (read: who got paid?)
& refer=conews&tkr=SIRI:US&sid=alWomkStRxIg
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?id=conewsstory
"On a scale from 1 to 10, people are stupid"
Honestly, one of the things that kept me away from sat. radio for so long was confusion over the concept of "commercial free". I imagined it just as you describe... Like having my iPod on shuffle. That doesn't really interest me, as I can do that on my own. I have to say that the DJs on the Sirius stations that I listen to (the Vault, Jam On) are refreshing to hear. The frequently have insights into the bands that are being played that are a very nice addition. It's what listening to radio "should" be like.
let me take a shot..
3) Listen to jazz (of any kind, or any kind of music for that matter) on the FREE Shoutcast or iTunes radio, and use the money to actually buy the songs you discover from the radio.
Cheaper and makes more sense. Hey they even got Howard Stern on Shoutcast 24/7.. turn from a sternaholic to sternophobic in just a couple of days!
Absolutely nothing, provided I have the capital to launch satellites and provide content.
Sirius has commercial free music stations. All other ones, comedy and talk, have commercials.
Wow, a comment from the past! Did you write this in October 2004, when Opie and Anthony started out? Then, they had tens of thousands of loyal listeners, who had waited 30 months while they were off the air, paying an extra two dollars a month to listen. They haven't been on the premium tier for a while, and are not only part of XM's regular channel lineup, but have the most popular show on the entire platform.
You sir, are a moron.
If you want to find new music, you should check out http://www.pandora.com/. It's a website that chooses songs to play for you based on artists and songs that you say you like. I find it works pretty well, although their license makes for unusual restrictions. It's all free (at the moment).
Clearly only available if you're listening from your computer with an internet connection, which you may already have another source for.
"Nothing shocks me. I'm a scientist." -Indiana Jones
Went with them because they had the only unit that could easily be fit into a DIN, the Starmate Replay. Neat little unit, too. I can rewind the last forty-four minutes of a station I've listened to, and has notifications for sport teams, and favourite songs/artists that are currently playing on the network. My car has two DIN slots. I didn't want some ungodly bright thing stuck onto my windshield or the dashboard. They may have been a bit cheaper to, I can't remember.
Anyway, I'm happy with the hardware, I'm happy with the service. I don't thing I've even ever listened to Howard Stern. As long as I can continue to use the unit after the merger, and the content more or less remains the same, I'll continute to be happy. Sirius Canada is a separate company anyway.
Karma: Can only be portioned out by the Cosmos.
That what I was refering to. Since both Sirius and XM were in a bidding war, they have to pay a higher premium to carry the exclusive contract. If they both merge, then they can go to NFL / MLB and get a lower price for the content, since there is no one else bidding up the price. Therefore their costs are lower, and they won't have to raise prices to the end consumer.
Yeah, the trouble with that is it doesn't work in the car. I originally thought about getting an internet radio setup in my car, but the data usage would've cost a fortune. Sirius works in the car and anywhere with an internet connection - road trips are a lot more tolerable with it.
Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
Look. I'm an iPod owner. I use it often. It is in no way comparable to radio. An iPod carries your stuff, already preselected. The radio offers other stuff, things you would have never thought of. It's not just an issue of commercials; I listen to the radio because I know that I will hear things I would otherwise go unaware of, and that is how I expand my musical collection.
There is no way that an iPod can replace radio. Likewise, there is no way that radio can replace an iPod. They are entirely different beasts. Sometimes there is no substitute for knowing no one is going to throw something in your ear you will hate; sometimes there is no substitute for snooping around and seeing what is new and different.
Having said that, commercial FM has never, at least in any city I have been in (that would be quite a few), come even close to the variety that either XM or Sirius offers. Markets for FM are local, and they can't afford to broadcast hard rock in the middle of a country demographic; likewise, you're not going to hear a lot of bluegrass in the middle of New York or Seattle. Satellite gives you access to what your taste in music is, no matter where you are. FM can't do that; that's why I no longer listen to FM. At all. And yes, there are no commercials, no "farm reports", no loss of music for some lame-ass high-school football game. FM. Yech.
A while ago, I had occasion to drive from Montana to Oregon to pick up some equipment. I listened to satellite radio the whole way. I had very few incidents of lost reception, mainly in deep canyons in Idaho for a few minutes here and there. Not perfect, but still very, very good. I listened to rock most of the time, but late at night, I switched to talk shows, and had 100% fade-free and constant reception for many hundreds of miles. You simply can't tell me that FM (or AM, for talk) can even approach satellite for any useful feature at all. Given that you can afford the gear and the fee, satellite simply cleans the competition's clock. And I use the term "competition" here quite loosely.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
XM has the better sound quality but Sirius seems to have the better content in many circumstances, in my opinion. For example, XM's metal channel went online-only some time ago, whereas Sirius' Hard Attack is both on the satellite and online has great shows with artist interviews, different sub-genres, etc.
What bugs me is that in the drive to be profitable, I can see the bean counters taking over eventually, marginalizing everything that's great about satellite -- delivering specialized, commercial-free(ish) content... similar to cable or pay TV.
-Stu
I have two cars, one with Sirus and one with XM. I've had the chance to take both on long hauls so I've listened to both Howard and O&A. After listening to both shows for extended periods of time, I don't think there is really any debate. I was a loyal Howard fan but when we began listening to O&A, my loyalties changed. There is just something about O&A that seems real, while Howard is trying to be a persona of his past. Howard's show has become stale to me even with the $500m retirement to satellite and O&A seems to me to be the real future. I still tune in to Howard when I have no choice, but given the choice, its O&A from now on. Personally I would use O&A as leverage to renegotiate a more economical deal with Sterns, but since Sirius is known for making really upside-down bad financial decisions, they will probably let O&A go and watch that segment of terrestrial radio out perform their stale flagship product.