XM-Sirius merger approved by DOJ

[leQ]

Source: CNN-money

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.



Read more: http://money.cnn.com/2008/03/24/news/companies/xm_sirius/?postversion=2008032415

[Renew Deal]

1. But... FCC approval is still required.

This process has been disgraceful.

[BlueGirlRedState]

2. I want my XM back

I have Sirius on my new car and it sucks big time. That woman on Sirius Left 146 at noon is AWFUL. Worse that awful. I have no words to describe how horrid she is.

I have to podcast AAR and listen to it on my commute. I want Randi back, live, on my radio!

[Atman]

4. It's all a matter of perspective, I guess.

I have Sirius in my car. My wife's new car came with XM free for three months. They called her to see if she wanted to keep it full time and she told them "No way, XM is terrible! I like Sirius better." So they let her have XM for another three months for $5/mo.

I think it's whatever one you started with and got used to, that seems to be the preference. Although this weekend I went on a long drive by myself in my wife's car and I did find a couple of XM stations I liked. Six of one, half-dozen of the other.

.

[bookman]

7. I've had both

I moved to XM when Air America became exclusive. I think you're talking about Lynn Samuels and I concur.

I don't think the music stations have commercials. I actually prefer the reception on XM.

The question becomes will we get more with merger. I'd love to have both Sirius Left and XM's Air America.

[maryallen]

10. Lynn Samuels. She is AWFUL!!!

She cusses for no reason; just to listen to herself sound obscene, I guess. And her voice: a high-pitched, nasal twang, is completely unsatisfactory for the radio.

And Alex Bennett is HORRIBLE, too! Totally obnoxious in every way. Both of them.

Just watch: If they merge, they'll keep Samuels and Bennett, but get rid of Tom Hartmann, whom I love.

[Judi Lynn]

23. They are hideous, empty people. It's a damnable shame Sirius has hired them to do Sirius LEFT,

as they are not only racist, but also driven to fritter away the time Air America former listeners would like to spend hearing info. in Democratic events yammering on about pure crap which has no meaning whatsoever.

Alex indulges in verbal masturbation, has a pointless and confused view of women he intends to force down everyone's throat, and Lynn gets lost babbling about tv shows, movies, singers' lives, shopping, more racist crap, and she has almost NO awareness of what's driving politics right now, or, if she does, she's certainly keeping it to herself.

There could NOT be a more squalid betrayal of paying customers possible than Sirius' version of "Talk Left's" daytime programming. It's a bonafide bait and switch. These two are there to talk about THEMSELVES, and it's a pitiful subject to share.

I can never get to the radio or the remote fast enough if I hear their filthy voices. My God.

[Acadia Blue]

30. I l ike Lynn;, Mike Malloy and all the others on Sirius left....it would

be great if we had Air America too. In the beginning we had both.

[chelsea0011]

11. You got that right. Lynn sucks completely. Total waste of air time.

[CANDO]

16. Lynn Samuels

She is so shrill sounding. She adores Matt Drudge. Always complaining about having to discuss politics....on a political talk channel.

[Judi Lynn]

24. She has also stated she loves Michael Savage.

When you think about it, it's not hard to believe, as THEY SOUND ALIKE! Same insane voices, hideous accents, loudmouthed yelling, and no grasp whatsoever of reality.






Michael Savage



God help us, it's Lynn Samuels.

[Acadia Blue]

31. Yea but she is funny.

[soothsayer]

46. Lynn Samuels? I love her! lol, she's a hoot

[michreject]

59. I have XM

in my truck, on my bike and a portable jobby-do. I want Sirius. I want the NBA and NFL.

[heliarc]

3. What?

This is ridiculous. Everything about Satellite radio is ridiculous. Proprietary players, bogus claims that there is no advertising, Pay for the public airwaves? The FCC doesn't stand for our rights anymore. XM came with the last car I bought and I liked it for 2 months and then the third month in crept the ads. Ads for everything. They called asking me to reup, and I said NO WAY. I'm not paying for programming that sells itself by saying there are no commercials but advertises at the same time.

[pimpbot]

5. Do you work for the NAB?

XM and Sirius paid for the license to the spectrum that they are broadcasting on, it was not free. Satellite radio uses much higher frequencies than normal AM/FM radio.

Its not for everyone, but for long car trips across country in areas where you get little to no good regular radio stations, its great.

[heliarc]

52. Yeah and bandwidth is cheap nowadays.

Seems to me that available Bandwidth is being eaten away by access only pay through your nose media. They've squeezed the industry I'm in out of free use bandwidth like UA to the tune of thousands of dollars of obsolete worthless equipment.

And what happened to Public service for the PRIVILEGE of access...? I haven't seen public service by way of ad-less Debates. I am continually appalled to see that innovations like C-Span require the vision of private enterprise when the origins of FCC policy put the public airwaves squarely in the hands of the public, NOT in the hands of corporations with enough money to "pay for the license" without reservation or public service. The fact that I have to pay $40 a month for cable access that gives me C-Span and my only competetive alternative isn't a cable alternative its satellite amounts to nothing less than Monopoly.

No XM and Sirius is "not for everyone" as you say, but our tax dollars put those satellites in the sky... it should be for everyone. Thinking that it shouldn't is believing the hype that the lobbyists in Washington want us to believe, and selling out our democracy.

And no I don't work for the NAB. I'm a consumer of low power transmitter/receiver systems for Music performance, Theatricals and Movie Production.

[Atman]

6. The only places I've heard ads are on the tv shows and talk-radio shows.

For instance, CNN (which sucks anyway) simply plays their current cable show over the satellite radio, complete with commercials. So, instead of airing the television commercials XM fills the commercial time with promos. They do this on a lot of the crossover channels, and the same with the "talk-radio" channels. I rarely, if ever, hear any commercials on the music stations, which is what I listen to 95% of the time anyway.

.

[heliarc]

53. And remember what they said when you had to pay for cable?

No commercials... that's why you are paying us for cable... commercial free. remember that? How long before these satellite pimps charge us for the same commercial laden crap that we ended up with on cable? We paid for the technology with our taxes. We should own it. I'm not paying 12 dollars a month for something my tax dollars developed.

[TommyO]

20. Satellite radio has never said it was completely commercial free

They have commercial-free music stations which is why I love it, and I can deal with the commercials on the talk channels, it's far less intrusive than the commercials on terrestrial radio.

I'm a Sirius listener, if it matters.

[Orsino]

27. I was disappointed, though...

...when XM Comedy suddenly added commercials. Mind-numbingly stupid ones, too. But I rotate between two comedy channels and Air America, with occasional trips to The Groove and XM Led.

I don't want to see yet another merger skate through the * Administration, even if it means I end up with more programming I like. Turning satellite radio into a monopoly won't be a good thing, and I will end up paying more.

[elifino]

8. XM CAME ON OUR NEW CAR

We are only interested in the 50 and 60 music, if we don't lose that I am OK with it.

[BigD_95]

9. I have Sirius & love it

but I cant stand several shows on "Left" starting with Lynn Samuels & Alex Bennett. Mark Thompson which is on when I travel home is pretty weak. I wish they ran ED Schultz SHOW until 6. But I do like the Bill Press show in the morning travel. Im really hoping with this merger that I will be able to get Air American Radio.

But Sirius has Howard and I'm a fan.



Im really glad the merger went through and the people that complain about paying for radio must not live in central PA where the only talk radio is conservative crap!

[Acadia Blue]

32. I love sirius too. I miss C-Span and some that went to XM. If XM

keeps everything, it would be super

[heliarc]

54. Yeah... I wonder why C-Span isn't a public service...

The way the original FCC intended such things. Instead we have to pay every month for access to our own government.

[Earth_First]

12. Righty-o!

I'll be glad to get AAR (as I subscribed to Sirius strictly for the Grateful Dead Channel).

[bigworld]

14. BBC World Service and POTUS 130 on XM

are almost worth the price of the subscription alone.

[joeglow3]

15. I won't pay for XM, but

POTUS is free (and has been since Jan.). Thus, I do find myself listening to POTUS 130 all the time.

[kirby]

13. Total BS!

The only two Satellite radio companies want to merge and eliminate competition.

How can the Bush DOJ get around this? Simple declare that ipods/itunes are a 'competitor' so there is no anti-competitive / anti-trust issues. What more did I expect from these guys.

[Thepricebreaker]

28. There are tons of other ways to listen to everything you get on XM...

[kirby]

29. Not over the air in your vehicle...

Most Genres of music aren't even on FM/AM anymore with the homogeneous Clear Channel style ownership / music programming. It really left Sirius and XM battling each other for subscribers to offer some differentiation (like Bluegrass or Classical). With a merger that incentive will be gone.

[soothsayer]

49. If they tick subscribers off by dropping important channels and raising prices, we will all leave

so I don't foresee that happening. the first savings for the combined company will be in overhead (only need to pay 1 ceo,not 2, etc.) and things like advertising budgets (which is a HUGE cost).

[Acadia Blue]

33. I have sirius in my home.

[pattmarty]

17. Isn't this a monopoly? These are the only two satelite..............

........ radio stations, right? I sure hope in this campaign we start to hear about ENFORCING THE ANTITRUST LAWS STILL ON THE BOOKS. How 'bout taking the useless Homeland security dept and switching it over to the Dept of antitrust? This is something we really need to get out there for the public to take a good long look at.

[soothsayer]

47. Well, since terrestrial radio has spent millions fighting this, i'd say NO, not a monopoly

[heliarc]

55. Terrestrial radio is a different service entirely.

And much more democratic so far. It is also much more highly regulated and for the benefit of the public I might add. If satellite technology had come about during the time that the FCC was founded it would be a public standard and would serve to democratize our country by unifying broadcast and serving the public. There would be a standard for encryption that was public and any manufacturer would be able to compete for a better receiver. After all, our NASA tax dollars went to develop the technology. Instead what did we get? A couple companies who locked down the methodology, charge the US taxpayer another monthly fee, and then start creeping in the ads. Now they are merging. This is a monopoly in NO UNCERTAIN TERMS.

[onenote]

56. I don't think you know what a monopoly is.

[heliarc]

58. I don't think YOU know what a monopoly is either.

Great response... care to expound?

[onenote]

60. sure: the issue is the market definition.

You could make almost any product a "monopoly" if you define the market narrowly enough. For example, the FTC tried to block the merger of two grocery chains -- whole foods and wild oats -- by defining the relevant product market as "premium and natural organic" food stores. However, a judge disagreed, finding that these stores compete in the larger "supermarket" sector -- that consumers look at these stores as one of many choices for groceries.

You could argue that XM and Sirius compete in the satellite radio market. And you'd be correct. But that doesn't mean that, for purposes of monopoly analysis, that the satellite radio market is the relevant market. The National Ass'n of Broadcasters spent a fortune lobbying against the XM/Sirius merger because, in reality, satellite radio competes with terrestrial radio and the relevant market includes both.

[heliarc]

61. In Rural America. Satellite is a monopoly

By your definition (and unfortunately the court's) technological advancement doesn't redefine the market. The thing that infuriates me about deals like this is that Satellite should be regulated by the FCC just like any medium of communication. But the rules have been hijacked to diminish public service and to favor these new markets and isolate them from regulation. It starts with the Cable companies edging out of regulation because the cable is private property (even though they use public telephone poles and cable ways to route it) Its insane and I'm in favor of any barricade to their progress. The FCC has been sold down the river and I'm sick of it.

[onenote]

64. cable companies are subject to more regulation than broadcast companies

All cable operators, in order to provide service, must have a locally granted franchise. Those franchises can, and frequently do, impose all manner of regulatory obligations on cable operators, including the provision of capacity for public, educational,and governmental access channels, financial and in-kind support for those channels, the payment of a 5 percent franchise fee, requirements for the construction and provision of "institutional networks" for the use of the municipality, to name just a few. Most cable operators remain, at least in theory, subject to having their "basic" rates regulated by the local government in accordance with federal standards, although most communities don't do bother. THere also are local consumer protection and customer service requirements relating to the notices that cable operators must provide when they make changes in services and rates, there are requirements that cable operators carry local broadcast stations and in some instances pay the "free" local broadcaster, and there are requirements that cable operators make additional capacity available for "lease" by unaffiliated programmers at government-mandated rates. Cable operators also are, in certain instances, subject to some of the same political advertising rules as broadcasters. All in all, cable is far more heavily regulated than broadcasting.

The main difference and the one place cable has an advantage is that the government is much more limited in its ability to regulate cable's content for indecency than broadcasting. (But in other respects, as noted, cable's content is regulated through the forced carriage of broadcasters, access channels etc.

[onehandle]

18. Good. If they don't merge, both companies will go under. I haven't listened to AM/FM in years.

I won't go back. For $13 dollars a month, I get over a hundred stations.

All of the music stations are commercial free. Now I can have the best of both companies.

I'm sure there will be some compromises, but in the end I believe the experience will be even better.

Plus, I listen to my iPod hooked up to my car radio. No loud annoying car dealership ads EVER!

[Winterblues]

19. Actually Sirius is now in the black and is actually the one aquiring the other

Sirius is buying out XM although they call it a merger. XM has been losing money for some time now while Sirius has actually made it into the black..Don't know if this is good or not but stocks for both companies have started to soar..

[onehandle]

21. The Stern deal was designed to make money in short run...

...but kill Sirius in the end.

Now they will thrive and Stern will become a radio billionaire.

[texasleo]

38. stern brings in three times as much as he takes out

plus, the name recognition has propelled Sirius to destroy xm in sales for three years in a row.

[Ordr]

41. Uh...what?

LOL

[joeglow3]

25. If by black, you mean ass tons of red, then you are correct.

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

I have ZERO problem with this deal. When it comes to your listening entertainment, there is radio, satellite radios, cd's, etc. It does no good to treat satellite radio as its own market, ensuring both companies and the industry fails.

[onehandle]

42. Yep. They would have died.

Now they have a chance.

How many industries were going to launch multiple satellites anytime soon?

Zero. XM and Sirius were going to die and now Maybe they won't.

[soothsayer]

48. lol!

[Acadia Blue]

34. I love satilite radio...I hope the merge works but no shows are lost.

[heliarc]

57. Are they really all commercial free?

I let my xm radio 3 month trial lapse because they started creeping in commercials. I called them to complain that they were misrepresenting their service in ads and they cried "boo hoo" cost of business is so high that we need to add commercials. Well I got out of dodge. I don't want to be party to the same BS that we got served when the Cable companies told us we weren't going to have to watch commercials for our $40 dollars a month and now I only have choice of one company in a Metro center like LA. I'm not getting duped twice. Satellite needs to play by the same rules of public service and utility that Terrestrial radio does. Granted, the public service requirements of Terrestrial radio have been gutted and 90% of that is crap too, (not to mention consolidated) but the alternative is selling out technology that WE developed as taxpayers. If that doesn't make us mad to be spending 13 dollars a month ($156 dollars a year) that should be in our pockets, than maybe we don't deserve the democracy that was handed down to us by our nation's founders.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

22. This was inevitable

in light of the bidding war between the two for radio talent that severely drained both companies.

[high density]

26. The only thing I like about this is that there will likely become a music-only tier

...if you buy a new receiver when the times comes. I'd gladly spend $xx on a new receiver if it meant the monthly fee was lower than $12.95. Right now I find myself listening to about four channels regularly and spend virtually no time on the talk/news/sports channels.

[Acadia Blue]

35. You can get the music only Sirius and Audiovox on Dish network TV

[jedr]

36. I think it's great news;

Agreed that sirius left leaves much to be desired, but it's not all bad. Anyway I have 160 other stations to listen to and they all beat Rush, and clear channel . I drive about 150 mi a day and I gladly pay my $13 / mo. to have some good entertainment. The merger will only make it better.

[littlebit]

37. I have had sirius for several years.

It was a lifesaver when I was a truck driver. I loved being able to listen to NPR without is cutting out. I also like Lynn Samuels. I think she is funny. I listened to Air America before the went to XM and they bored me to tears.

[onehandle]

43. Satellite Radio was designed for truck drivers.

Or at least it would seem so.

I couldn't imagine long drives without it.

If I was a truck driver, I would thank God for its invention.

[Judi Lynn]

39. They should put Alex Bennett and Lynn Samuels on a separate channel and leave

Talk Left for people who are truly concerned about politics.

They simply need to be moved out of the way. It's fine if they ply their trade somewhere where they won't be taking up space where knowledgeable people are desperately needed.

Maybe they can open an asshole channel.

[onehandle]

44. Sirius seems to want to kill their Left channel.

It's been getting worse and worse.

Cutting Stephanie Miller to One Hour a Day!?

Boy did I ever complain about that.

[Doctor_J]

40. So 4 non-right-wing talk stations shrink down to 2,

and soon thereafter SirXM will discontinue those and we'll be back to 2003. Clean out the FCC and return radio to the people. Soon

[onehandle]

45. Fuck the FCC!

Sirius-ly.

[heliarc]

62. Correction: F--- the lackeys on the FCC

[MilesColtrane]

50. I dropped XM over a year ago for several reasons.

Subscription price continued to rise while the stations I enjoyed listening to were eliminated.

I also was turned off by the repetitious programming. I kept noticing the same music played in the same order day to day.

[heliarc]

63. I second this.

I left after my trial subscription ended cause of the loops and the creeping ads.

I hated giving up C-Span, but that should be a public service anyway. C-Span should be piped into everyone's house free even if you don't have a Cable plan. There are enough ways of doing it. WiFi, Satellite, Cable, Even telephone if you have DSL... To me it just seems like the FCC has been hijacked since Cable took over.

[kentauros]

51. A little cafe I eat at has XM, and I haven't been impressed.

I get Sirius for free with my Dish subscription, and I'm not impressed with it, either. The "CD Music" channels play better music on Dish as part of my sub, no commercials and no annoying voice-overs. I don't have Satellite service in my car, I have a radio/CD/mp3 deck instead. I tend to listen to music downloaded for free off the 'net (that is, public-domain or music that has been given away as one would find at weirdomusic.com) or the local Pacifica station, something not represented on Satellite radio.

If they want to monopolize Satellite Radio, they can go ahead. It was really nothing more than semi-commercial radio to begin with. The better choice would be to go with any of the new portable Internet Radio devices :) There's so much more music and talk available online than XM or Sirius can touch anyway.