Monday, February 19, 2007 - 12:50 pm
XM and Sirius to merge ? Rumors have been flying for some time about a merger, but this seems fairly solid:
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/story?id=2887179
Monday, February 19, 2007 - 5:05 pm
"Kevin Martin, chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, reportedly said last month that a merger could not be approved under current FCC regulations."
They tried this before and it failed. What makes them think they can get by this time? After all, it creates a monopoly, does it not?
Not even two players can survive apparently. This would result in more job losses if they consolidate.
Monday, February 19, 2007 - 8:21 pm
Kevin Martin, chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, reportedly said last month that a merger could not be approved under current FCC regulations.
They tried this before and it failed. What makes them think they can get by this time? After all, it creates a monopoly, does it not?
Not even two players can survive apparently. This would result in more job losses if they consolidate
Monday, February 19, 2007 - 8:22 pm
Ok, so let them merge and we will just regulate it then!
That works for me.
Monday, February 19, 2007 - 8:29 pm
Their licenses specifically forbid merging, although that could be waived by the FCC. Neither one has ever made a dime, incidentally.
Monday, February 19, 2007 - 8:39 pm
Sounds like either we don't really need another form of radio, or that it's not the kind of thing easily done privately.
Monday, February 19, 2007 - 9:23 pm
brings up the question of whether the fed govt should bankroll a bankrupt satellite "radio" service.
Monday, February 19, 2007 - 10:59 pm
I would hope that the government would not "bankroll" any failing satellite radio services. I just can't envision any kind of national security or similar argument why they should.
Tuesday, February 20, 2007 - 8:08 am
I'm there too.
It's really an optional thing. Either it's compelling enough to stand on it's own, or not.
Where it gets interesting is traditional radio. Is Sat failing a good or bad thing for it.
On one hand, companies can then know they have the product and really have no solid incentive to improve their offerings. On the other, having the product is a good reason to really improve and lock in that element of culture. Make some serious investments, not just tech, but people more research, etc... to bring out the real dollars and make it as relevant as possible.
Tuesday, February 20, 2007 - 1:05 pm
Paying 100's of millions for marginal "talent" like Howard Stern is one of the reasons they haven't made a dime. Factor in executive bonuses
and other franchise fees they've overpaid for
and you have a recipe for losing money.
Tuesday, February 20, 2007 - 6:11 pm
MysteryDA said>>>>
Paying 100's of millions for marginal "talent" like Howard Stern.
So when is YOUR radio show on????
Wednesday, February 21, 2007 - 12:17 am
Mysterydj said; Paying 100's of millions for marginal "talent" like Howard Stern.
Marginal is an overstatement.
Talent is a misnomer when speaking about that waste of skin.
Everytime he breathes he's cheating someone else out of air!
I'd rather listen to 100 women drag their fingernails on a chalkboard for 10 hours than 10 seconds of that slime ball.
While he did bring a lot of customers to Sirius, he's not worth 5¢ much less $500 million.
IMNSHO
