Slashdot Mirror


Sirius, XM Merger Gets FCC Approval

Multiple readers, including koavf, have written to tell us the FCC has finally approved the Sirius-XM merger that has been in the works for quite a while now. CNN has picked up AP coverage as well. We discussed approval of the merger by the Justice Department a few months ago. From CNN: "The Federal Communications Commission voted 3-2 to approve the buyout, with the tiebreaker coming Friday night from Republican commissioner Deborah Taylor Tate. Tate had insisted that the companies settle charges that they violated FCC rules before she would approve the deal. The companies agreed this week to pay $19.7 million to the U.S. Treasury for violations related to radio receivers and ground-based signal repeaters. FCC Chairman Kevin Martin confirmed the final vote Friday night. 'I think it's going to be, in the end, a good thing for consumers and be in the public interest,' he told The Associated Press."

11 of 187 comments (clear)

  1. Business as usual by Chester+K · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Of course, the merger comes with strict conditions to keep things in the public interest.

    Conditions like the conditions XM and Sirius were originally given when they were granted space on the spectrum. Conditions such as "these two companies may never, ever be allowed to merge".

    --

    NO CARRIER
    1. Re:Business as usual by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If the companies can't survive without each other, what's the harm in letting them merge? It's not like they're going to lock you out of terrestrial radio. Times change. Just because before we said "You may never merge" doesn't mean it should apply today.

    2. Re:Business as usual by Shihar · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah? And Ford has a monopoly on cars made by Ford. w00t. Someone call the lawyers.

      All companies are monopolies if you narrow the 'slice' of what you are looking at down far enough. You need to look at the big picture though. Sure, Sirius and XM have a monopoly on satellite radio, but satellite radio sure as hell doesn't have a monopoly on ears. I happily listen to an MP3 player or free radio on my way into work without feeling the slightest pressure to go dump however much it costs for bad satellite radio.

      Monopolies only work when there are no or few other viable option. If there is a simple substitution, the monopoly is broken, even if it isn't exactly the same product. It is like if Apple all of a sudden started to charge even higher prices for that silly little MP3 players. You couldn't cry foul over their "monopoly" on iPods. Sure, iPods might not be available at a reasonable price, but a smart person would just pick up another MP3 player that is cheaper.

      The reason why they two are being allowed to merge is because one is going to tank if they don't merge. One is going to tank because satellite radio is getting murdered by the competition. If one is going to go bust, it is better to let them do it in a less destructive manner. It would be one thing if satellite radio was dominating and people were clawing at each other to break into the market. That isn't the case though, satellite radio is just barely hanging on. Letting the two companies merge is far more likely to result in quality improvements and price drops as they consolidate their infrastructure and struggle to compete in the less than profitable radio market.

    3. Re:Business as usual by Chester+K · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If the companies can't survive without each other, what's the harm in letting them merge?

      The companies might have a valid case about 'not being able to survive without each other' if they didn't make almost suicidally bad business decisions like paying Howard Stern 300 million dollars only to find out he can't bring in enough subscribers to even break even on his paycheck.

      And if they were to have failed individually, I'm sure there are plenty of buyers who'd love to have gotten their assets and put together a profitable satellite radio company with their current subscriber numbers.

      Instead they got what amounts to a bailout -- except instead of dollars, the currency of their bailout is fair competition to the benefit of consumers in a market that's now effectively being made into a government approved, privately maintained monopoly

      --

      NO CARRIER
    4. Re:Business as usual by Shihar · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You miss the point entirely. Honda has a monopoly on Honda Civics. Only Honda is allowed to make a Civic by law. Despite this, we don't consider Honda a monopoly, simply because there are lots of other cars by other companies that we consider "civic like" such that you can easily find an alternative. If Honda was to double the price of a Civic tomorrow, you would just by a different car and feel only mildly annoyed.

      On the other hand, if Honda was the only one allowed to build cars in general, we would call them a monopoly. Many people need a car and have no real alternative to a car. Sure, airplanes, trains, and buses compete with cars, but they compete poorly in many instances. Only a car is going to drive you 25 miles through a New England winter from one small town to another.

      The Sirius and XM merger is not a big deal for two reasons.

      1) There are lots of alternatives. If the price of cars doubled, many people would simply shell out double the cash to get one. If the price of XM/Sirius doubles without a quality improvement that people find fair, they will simply stop using the service. Free AM/FM radio are direct competitors with satellite radio. MP3 players are also direct competition for satellite radio. I can't substitute riding the bus for buy a car in many instances, but it is pretty trivial to substitute an iPod for satellite radio.

      2) There is going to be only one satellite company, like it or not. Neither Sirius or XM are profitable. One of them WILL go bankrupt in the next couple of years. Once that happens you will be left with... one satellite radio station. They are begging to be allowed to merge because they want the destruction of the companies to be productive, rather then have one scattered to the wind while the other scrambles to pick up the pieces.

      Like it or not, there will be only one satellite radio station. The only question is if it is going to happen in a couple of years when one finally throws in the towel, or because they merged and combined programing in an attempt to better compete with AM/FM and MP3 players.

    5. Re:Business as usual by nawcom · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Heh, please someone explain the filth that his show supposedly has... I've heard more offensive material than what he has. Is it the pro-homosexuality aspect of the show (George Takei) or is it the open opinions of the show? Controversial interviews? Sick humor (get over it, nerds love sick humor, and if you are grossed out by it then you're on the wrong website). Maybe it's the occasional use the the *quiets* ... f-word used as an adjective... No no no... it's the pro-choice aspect of it. Or is it because he loves to make fun of a certain KKK member? Noooo... no one makes fun of the KKK. Oh wait.. he degrades women... yeahhh... give me a fucking break. With all the female listeners who love the show, the last thing he does is degrade females. If some porn star wants to come on the show, the first thing you would expect is for her to get nude. (What's funny is the same people who beat off to porn find this offensive.) The worst he does is point out the stupidity in porn stars. He's had an African American female co-anchor since the early 80s in DC101. Oh I know why you are disgusted with the filth... because every one who has never heard his show makes negative assumptions. That's the real reason.

  2. Re:WTF??? by Giometrix · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How could a single, monopolistic provider of a service, nationwide, be "a good thing for consumers and be in the public interest" ????

    Has Orwellian doublespeak progressed so far??

    Because Satellite Radio is not a monopoly; it is competing against FREE terrestrial radio, mp3 players, ipods, FREE internet radio, etc.

    --
    Download free e-books, lectures, and tutorials at bookgoldmine.com
  3. Satellite Radio is a joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    When I think of satellite radio, I think of this:
    *Major genres unrepresented.
    *Station playlists that would become predictable within a week.
    *Sub-genres within all genres utterly unrepresented in general (for example, one Metal station on all of Sirius, and it only plays death metal).
    *A whole slew of stations essentially devoted to playing the exact same stuff that you hear on standard Top 40 radio.
    *Commercials, despite being advertised as commercial-free.
    *Annoying DJs (the receivers display the name/artist playing, you do NOT need DJs trying to be funny between every song).
    *Oh, and a monthly fee on top of that.

    Frankly, satellite radio was created 10 years too late. Why should I put up with satellite radio when I can use my mp3 player?

  4. Re:WTF??? by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Its good because they were both unprofitable. Hopefully after the merger they will be able to be solvent. Satellite radio is awesome, whether anyone realizes it or not. There is NO CENSORSHIP WHAT-SO-EVER. I'd repeat some of the things said here, but I think my ISP would object. The company suits do not make music selections, unlike any other radio station on earth. No static, unlimited range, an entire channel dedicated to the grateful dead. Chill, house, ambient, thrash metal, punk, bluegrass, three types of jazz all at your finger tips, and even if you hate music they have a top 40 station, a brittish top 40 station, and a couple Canadian channels.

    --
    Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
  5. Oversight as usual by jevvim · · Score: 4, Interesting

    In the beginning, there were a lot more ads on satellite radio. One of the two companies (I forget which) decided to focus on ad-free music channels; amazingly, the other company reduced the number of channels with ads as well. Post-merger, I'm concerned that Big Satellite (B.S.) will finally take aim at the terrestrial market. With only one satellite service type, how long until we see automobiles that come with a free B.S. receiver but the terrestrial receiver (AM/FM) costs extra? To me, though, it comes down to the apparent difference between Republican and Democratic oversight: Republicans reject regulations unless a direct fault can be seen (well, satellite competes with terrestrial, so it's not a monopoly) whereas Democrats demand regulations unless a direct fault can be guaranteed not to happen (well, they could become a monopoly, so forbid them from merging). I'm curious how much the FCC could "change" this decision in a year, should the executive branch return to Democratic hands.

  6. Monopoly by qbzzt · · Score: 4, Informative

    Depends on how close is the substitution. If Ford was the only company making cars, and the other options were walking and horses, they'd be a monopoly. If Ford ward the only company making SUVs, but you could buy cars and minivans from other sources, it wouldn't be a monopoly in any meaningful sense of the word.

    Apple is the only company making Macs, but they don't have a meaningful monopoly because you can always use a PC.

    --
    -- Support a free market in the field of government