Your prediction: Will XM/Sirius merger go through?
Steve Safran February 28th, 2007
There are only three things that stand in the way of the XM/Sirius merger: The FCC, The FTC and the Justice Department. Oh - and the NAB and Consumers Union. So five. Probably more. Still, Mel Karmazin’s a smart businessman. And he says he’s willing to have the new company cap prices and do the regulation tango with the government if he has to. So your opinion of whether you want it to happen or not aside, will the XM/Sirius merger be allowed to go through?
9 Comments Add your own
1. sean tubbs | February 28th, 2007 at 9:28 pm
Could the whole thing be a publicity stunt for both companies, prompting lots of debate on message boards over which one is better?
I don’t see it happening. Too much like a monopoly.
2. Mitch | February 28th, 2007 at 11:01 pm
I think it’s a great idea as long as one of the companies has to return it’s spectrum and the FCC auctions it to the highest bidder. I somehow doubt XM and Siruis will be so eager to merge if they know CBS or News Corp. will be entering the business.
3. Chump | March 1st, 2007 at 8:51 am
I see no obstacles to the merger. The merger would not create a monopoly because they compete with every other form of media that is out there….(terresterial radio, TV, mobile online, ipods)
Its a different world and the competition is for attention from the user!
4. invitedmedia | March 1st, 2007 at 9:27 am
chump has a point; anyone dumb enough to want to buy such an expensive method of delivery deserves the gov’t’s consent.
5. Randy Hoffman | March 1st, 2007 at 9:40 am
I think the merger should go through, and given Mel’s track record, probably will go through. But my reasoning for the merger has nothing to do with listeners. It has everything to do with business models. Terresterial radio, championed by NAB/RAB, argue a combined XM/Sirus will make a monopoly and provide unfair advantages to satellite radio. Really? Well over 50% of all radio station’s revenue comes from LOCAL advertisers. This is ad revenue satellite radio cannot compete for or sell into. So exactly how will this satellite radio “monopoly” provide unfair competition to the media landscape’s status quo?
6. thelaulauchannel | March 1st, 2007 at 9:57 am
why couldn’t a piece of software detect where the listener is situated and put local ads in their ears?
i often wonder about this with local tv’s web channels. just today i was reading how an “icon” in hawaii’s plate lunch restaurant scene is closing its doors for good (ever eat “lau lau”???). i laughed my way through the entire article because i ate there several times over the years.
but not one ad was shown to me of LOCAL interest.
perhaps a differentiation needs to be made on these wide-scale delivery methods that defines LOCAL content seperate from the LOCALE of the viewer/listener.
BTW- no like lau lau.
7. qnbajflt lbzea | June 11th, 2007 at 11:52 am
ocnzem oemwxltny ydoiqskx qurc quimrexkj clht tgal
8. 2005 porsche 911 turbo | September 22nd, 2007 at 4:46 am
Very good site. Thank you!
9. Alexander Q | February 4th, 2008 at 10:49 am
How could anyone think it is a monopoly?? First off, it’s not something you NEED! If you want it, you cant buy it. Second, there are tons of competition, basic radio, IPOD and all MP3 players, ANY media, such as TV. In no way is it a monopoly, the politicians against it are the ones that get money and are sponsored from regular radio, thats why they don’t want it to go through.
Leave a Comment
(Please keep URLs out of the comment body or the spam filter will block you.)Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed