The XM and Sirius agreement should have been done a long time ago and is the only thing that will give satellite radio any real chance at long-term survival. Subscription products in a free environment are always niche, and cross-platform incompatibility prevents complete market penetration. Eliminating system incompatibilities will enable people to buy a satellite radio without any worries that they are buying a dead horse. Format wars are alway dumb, as nobody really ever wins.
The two companies worked over the weekend to finalize a plan that is expected to be structured as a “merger of equals,” although ABC News has learned the plan calls for Sirius CEO Mel Karamzen to run the new company.
As I said above, this is the only thing that will give subscription (ad-supported may come and dominate for all we know) satellite radio any opportunity to succeed.
I hope the players will get better the ones they have now are pretty crappy.
I don’t see satellite radio surviving behind being a niche. It’s a solution to a problem hardly anyone has.
Oh great. A monopoly. Super.
3. “Oh great. A monopoly. Super.”
A monopoly over a product that no one actually wants is nothing to be concerned about. I have a monopoly over my own shit, but it hasn’t done me a bit of good.
#2, #4 it makes you wonder why cable television has thrived. doesn’t it?
so long as I can get MLB and NPR on one receiver, I am cool with it. given all the other media consolidation that’s been going on, I find it highly suspicious that the FCC would balk at this. the terrestrial radio oligopoly has been trying to use the Federal government to cripple satelite competition for years. It would not surprise me if they pushed to kill the deal.
and satellite radio really should go to an approximation of the cable TV model – have a commercial supported basic tier that is free (yes I know basic cable isn’t free) and a subscription “premium” tier without commercials.
Well I for one am a little disappointed about this. I bought a Sirius radio as a direct result of Clear Channel’s horrendous programming in my area. They literally bought up every decent music station, closed half of them down, turned half of the rest into spanish stations, and filled the remaining tollerable stations with so many commercials that I could barely tolerate my drive to work every day.
Once I got my sat radio it completely changed my attitude throughout the day. The absence of commercials and extremely broad and appealing selection of music channels has been a wonderful change of pace to someone who truly enjoys music.
I bought Sirius because Clear Channel owns a portion of XM and they are well known for mandating that XM introduce commercials into a handful of their music channels.
While I understand that Clear Channel is scheduled to lose thier shares of XM in 2008 I have a bad feeling that they are going to try and do something to somehow extend more control over the newly formed alliance.
In regards to a product that costs money in a free environment, all I can say is that there is a reason why cable and sat TV providers are in business. If you hit the right price point, people will pay for a wider selection of something that they use on a regular basis. While the majority of consumers may go the cheap route (see *.Mart) there will always be a market out there for people who want more of something better. It just may take a little longer to recoup the costs if that something better includes launching/acquiring several sattelites.
People complaining about paying for radio? Hah, the same whiners I heard complaining about TV years ago.
I gladly pay a few bucks a month to eliminate the commercials, have infinitely better sound quality, and some actual diversity in my music. If you prefer to listen to the same 10 songs over and over again then FM is just the ticket for ya.
#2, many, many people are fed up with “free” OTA radio and have not listened to it for years.
Companies buy up all the stations and take away music choices when they change formats.
I enjoy the quality of satellite radio and that I have the same channels wherever I go nationwide. It’s awesome having over 100 channels of news, music and comedy.
It’s like cable TV for your car radio. Who watches OTA TV anymore? About 15% of the population. I see sat. radio, or what it might evolve into, as becoming the norm for receiving programming in your car.
They merged…
It’s about time.. I won’t pay for it but i’m surrounded by people that do..
they all seem to love sat radio
but it’s still gonna be a long time before they make good money
Isn’t Satellite radio ultimate doomed? To be killed off by fast digital cellular service?
I’ve never read or heard this anywhere but it seems kind of obvious.
They may have a difficult time getting this past the FCC. They’re not the most logical people in the world.
I’m anti-monopoly but this merger doesn’t create a monopoly on radio — just on one delivery method, so it doesn’t strike me as much of a problem.
9. “many, many people are fed up with “free” OTA radio and have not listened to it for years.”
So you’re saying they solved their radio problem by simply not listening to radio anymore? Makes sense to me. I haven’t listened to radio in several years. If I want music I’ll bring my MP3 player. I’m guessing a lot of people are doing that nowadays as a replacement for radio without the expense of satellite radio.
“I enjoy the quality of satellite radio and that I have the same channels wherever I go nationwide.”
What you’re forgetting is that the overwhelming majority of people do not travel nationwide, especially by car or truck. Sure, if I were a trucker I’d love satellite radio. But considering my drive to work is only 20 minutes, it really wouldn’t be worth it.
3,
The issue is not a monopoly as much as a common operating standard.
Wait, you’re endorsing a merger, and in the media industry no less?
Maybe you’ll consider this every other time you’re bashing big corporate monopolies.
17,
Read what I say in my post. Where did I say I support a monopoly? It is the common device standard that is important.
I’ve been a Sirius subscriber (and stock holder) for about a year or so.
I really enjoy the commercial free music. I also love the variety of different music I get. If I want to hear the typical top 40 “hits” over and over, I even have a choice for that as well.
I listen to Howard Stern when my kid isn’t in the car, and Radio Disney when he is.
I have an iPod, and a way to play it in the car. Sometimes, I play the iPod, sometimes I play Sat. Radio. if someone gives me a CD to listen to, I’ll play that as well. What am I leaving out. FM radio.
In my small market, although Clear Channel owns most of the radio stations, the #1 station in our market for the coveted 18-24 demographic is a station NOT owned by them. I like the morning show crew from that station, and my wife still enjoys listening to them. I just can’t stand to listen to stoopid (and yes, I know stupid is the correct spelling, but it’s just my thing) commercials that take up 1/3 of every hour.
Heck, I was a fan of JP Broadcasting’s “Bob and Sheri” show, UNTIL I got Sirius. Now, I ‘d rather listen to Howard, or music in the mornings.
I’m hoping that since it seems that Sirius’ CEO will head up the new company, we won’t have ads on music stations. That is a big selling point of Sirius versus XM. I’m paying my subscription, I don’t want ads!
And to those who say that HD radio will beat sattelite? Not if HD is going to be supported by advertisers. Radio is where the local TV stations were 30 years ago (or so)
You have to wonder how this makes economic sense. XM offers about 170 channels and Sirius about 190 which combined will bring the total to 360. What is anybody going to do with 360 channels? Both charge $12.95 a month for service so to pay for all those combined channels, they would have to charge $25.90. Who is going to pay that? It would be like paying for both services and why would you want or need that? Then there’s the problem of incompatible standards. You could continue to listen to one or the other depending on which platform you bought into, but you would need new equipment if you wanted to listen to the combined service. Not to mention creating a monopoly in the satellite radio market. What this proves is that neither of these companies can survive on their own. If they could, they wouldn’t need this merger.