http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8VJVVF01&show_article=1

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Justice Department approved Sirius Satellite Radio's $5 billion buyout of rival XM Satellite Radio on Monday, saying the deal was unlikely to hurt competition or consumers.
The deal was approved despite opposition from consumer groups and an intense lobbying campaign by the land-based radio industry.

The buyout received shareholder approval in November. The companies said the merger will save hundreds of millions of dollars in operating costs—savings that will ultimately benefit their customers.

The Justice Department, in a lengthy news release explaining its decision, said the two companies compete not just with each other but also with other forms of radio and entertainment.

"The likely evolution of technology in the future, including the expected introduction in the next several years of mobile broadband Internet devices, made it even more unlikely that the transaction would harm consumers in the longer term," the Justice Department said. "Accordingly, the division has closed its investigation of the proposed merger."

XM Satellite shares rose $1.97, or 16.5 percent, to $13.90 in afternoon trading after the government's announcement while Sirius shares rose 28 cents, or almost 10 percent, to $3.18.

...And XM Chief Creative Officer Lee Abrams jumps ship just in time.

Not being a listener to satellite radio myself, I have some questions for people who have listened to both Sirius and XM: Are there noticeable differences in program philosophy between the in-house programmed channels on XM vs. those on Sirius. Do the production styles on XM sound different than those on Sirius? Do you have a preference for one service over the other and if so, why? My reason for asking these questions is that Lee Abrams made a big deal on his blog about how he wanted XM to sound different than anything else out there and that he had very high standards for quality and originality of the production used on programming originated at XM.

The other question--which might not be answerable at this point--is how the consolidation of the two services will be performed. For how long will the two services have different channel lineups?

I can't address the production style of XM as I have only listened to a small amount of their programming in a rental car.

The duplicate channels will be eliminated leaving a very large selection of original programming and although the two companies use different signal compression, apparently existing receivers (either XM or Sirius) are capable of receiving both types (provider option, not end user option).

Alfredo,

I've had a Sirius radio for about 2.5 years and I love it.

I haven't really spent much time listening to the XM line up, so I can't personally say whether it's better or worse.

I guy I work with in LA, has a Sirius radio and likes his too. His wife has a XM radio in her vehicle and I know he said he doesn't like it as much.

The main reason I chose Sirius over XM is that the Sirius music channels are on my Dish Network satellite receiver and I'm used to them.

That being said, I almost went with XM because of the douche bag Howard Stern is on Sirius!

Thinking about how this 'merger' will affect we listeners: First... I assume... they need to resolve technical issues like the two sytems being incompatible. That means developing a two-system reciever. Then some serious marketing, including re-visits to both companies' car deals. The fastest way to synergy is to get two-system radios into new cars asap.

Assuming that: a whole bunch of satellite radio real estate is going to open up, i.e., just one 60's channel, just one feed of CNN, FNC, FNT, etc.

Now the dilema: What will go on those new channels? The return of some old XM and Sirius rejects? Channels given over to creative minds to come up with innovated and even narrower nitch music formats? More original sports, news and talk?

It could be a bright new future we we satellite junkies. Except for two words: Mel Karmazin. Yeah, he paid for Howard - a known star. Is he going to invest the time and money in developing a stable of satellite stars (On XM, there are actual popular DJ's? Anybody like Terry Young over at Sirius?). History says no. History says forget about anything that involves patience. History says make this quarter's numbers or get out.

So.. get out

Sen. Arlen Specter was on Howard Stern Show last Wednesday. Howard asked Senator Specter why the Sirius-XM merger was taking so long to be approved, but the senator claimed there was “no sense of urgency” surrounding the issue. Howard and Robin objected to his “urgency” statement, so Specter explained that it wasn't a part of the larger (and more pressing) issues facing Congress, like health care. Howard agreed but thought that they did more non pressing and less important things quickly than the merger. Specter then went on to tell Howard to wait and it would be taken care of in about a week.

Well, it looks like it was 5 days.

This merger has nothing to do with anything except making bigger profits by buying out the competition, reducing programming and delivery costs, and increasing the chance of surviving the inevitable growth of free IP service in the car. Down the road it will be a hard sell to consumers whom will have a plethora of options available without subscription fees. Yes, there will always be a small percentage of subscribers whom are there because it is the only way to get their special program (Stern is a prime example) but the hundreds of music channels with burnt out rock stars hosting and programmed by the machine will have to compete with better done fare available on the net. Look what the consolidation of terrestrial radio has caused. Less original programming, targeted demographic micro-casting, and most importantly ... stagnant and in some cases declining ad revenue. This merger may be, in fact, the beginning of the end of Sirius, that is they may be biting off more than they can chew. But don't worry about it proponents, there will always be another set of deep pocketed fools that think they can make it work. They'll come in, fire half the staff, eliminate half the programming, ... I mean come on, you all know the drill.

As usual, the "terrestrials" are running scared, trying to salvage an outdated and dying technology.

C'mon, this merger has been a long time coming and the Justice Dept made the right decision... in spite of the radio lobbyists payouts.

Good move.

Alfredo,
A few years ago, I considered both... at the time Sirius was a little more expensive but had fewer channels with commercials. XM now has increased the number of commercial free channels. The music channels to me, seemed pretty much the same on both. Sound quality on Sirius seemed to be a little better, while XM offered more channels.
My wife is a NFL football fan, so we chose Sirus for it's NFL coverage.
FCC approval ?

And of course the FCC has to approve all this. The Commission does have a track record of denying this kind of merger, so its not yet a done deal. But arguably the biggest hurdle was the DOJ approval.

I dont like XM as well as I do Sirius.

What I thought was most amusing was that manifesto Clear Channel put out with their demands and conditions of the merger. This laundry list will come up again ( being reviewed as we type, no doubt ) when the FCC puts their stamp of approval on all of this.

I have had Sirius for 4 years and love it. I think the sports on Sirius beats XM hands down. I also love Hair Nation! Great butt rock! I have heard XM has some commercials on their music channels now. Not sure if that is true because I do not have XM.

I'm gonna look on the bright side of this: At least CC is the one getting bought out! That's gotta be good for something!

Although I'm no cheerleader for the satellite radio companies, I'm not sure if WiMax access in vehicles automatically means death for them. A lot of video can be watched on the Internet today, yet I don't hear people saying that the death of the satellite TV and cable TV companies is just around the corner. Or, is there some other factor that makes it unfair to compare satellite radio to satellite/cable TV?

You don't watch TV in the car.

MERGERMANIA CONTINUES UNABATED

Radio, both terrestrial and satellite, still have two huge advantages over potential competition: real-time and portability. Wi-max will certainly happen some day semi-soon up and down I-5. But good luck using your cell device on US 97 around Maupin or outside Goldendale.
Of course, terrestrial radio still has the 'local' advantage, if owners again decide to use it.

You can listen to 25 channels of XM for free at AOL.com

And I think that will lead to a free band of satellite channels, in order to draw interest from listeners. The free band will probably run spots and heavy ads for the subscription service. That's really the way to go if you want to get your technology into more cars and homes; make some of the content free. I think it'll be like limited basic cable versus expanded/premium cable is now.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/23/technology/23digi.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Radio is fine. It's just being impacted by artifacts that result from large scale ownership. Loosen that up, innovation will happen, and radio will carry on nicely.

I wish the merger would hurry up and go thru. I live on the east side of the state and were I live I can not pick up the Mariners games. Baseball to Sirius, HECK YES!!!