FCC Nixes Satellite Radio Merger 277
a_nonamiss writes "Doesn't look like Sirius and XM are going to merge any time soon. I'm not sure how I feel about this one. Logically, I know that competition is a good thing for consumers, and monopolies are generally only good for companies. Still, I don't like having to choose a car based on which satellite radio service comes pre-installed, or considering whether I'd rather have Howard Stern or Oprah, because there is no practical way to get both. Frankly, it's probably all this exclusivity that has caused me not to purchase either system." From the article: "Federal Communications Commission Chairman Kevin Martin told reporters after an FCC meeting that the Commission would not approve a merger between satellite radio rivals Sirius and XM Radio... When the FCC initially licensed the two satellite radio companies in 1997, there was language in the licensing barring one from acquiring control of the other... Even if the FCC were to have a change of heart..., it would still have to pass antitrust scrutiny by the Department of Justice."
It just doesn't matter... (Score:2, Interesting)
Open standards (Score:5, Interesting)
You could solve this with a monopoly offering a single proprietary solution.
Or you could enforce that both Sirius and XM adhere to and publish an open standard, such that a single receiver device can be used to tune in both. If the FCC had balls and were ethical, that's what they'd have done.
Anyone else see this leading to more oversight. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Open standards (Score:3, Interesting)
And then some clever entrepeneur makes a cheap receiver that receives both, but for free. Both XM and Sirrius would then be forced to make up their money via advertising.
No thanks. The appeal of satellite radio is partially in the lack of advertising. I don't know how long this will last (remember that cable TV started out practically ad-free too), but it's good now for those willing to pay for the price of service.
Re:Go with logic (Score:3, Interesting)
Respectfully, I think the statement above argues for the merger, not against. Also, I think the FCC really blew it when they initially allowed this service and mandated that no mergers would be allowed from the get go. With only two services going in as startups on a brand new technology being released to the public, you are almost guaranteeing that one will fail eventually. It might be a different story if there had been a couple more besides XM and Sirius from the starting gate.
Ever listened to satalite radio? (Score:4, Interesting)
- I live near Eau Claire, Wisconsin. Needless to say, the selection of stations is not exactly the broadest. Definite XM advantage here.
- I frequently drive through areas with even LESS of a selection of stations than Eau Claire. XM is a godsend when you'd otherwise be spending hours driving through, say, Nebraska, listening to Country or Country.
- No commercials on (most) XM stations! Listening to radio is much nicer when you're not constantly interrupted with whatever the radio promotion of the week is.
- NO MORNING SHOWS! Well, actually, there are morning shows, but they don't TAKE OVER your regular radio stations and prevent you from listening to actual music.
Now, maybe you personally don't want to pay for radio. That's fine. But there is no shortage of reasons why someone would be willing to pay for the features satellite radio offers over regular broadcast stations.
Re:Open standards (Score:3, Interesting)
The fact that they are pushing their signals at me. They are sending me signals without me asking for it. Then the FCC says I cannot do whatever I want with the signals people sent me without me asking for it. It's like someone pushed a newspaper under my door and the FCC said I cannot read it unless I pay a $99.95/month subscription.
If they don't want me to decode their signal, they shouldn't beam that signal at me.
No Exclusivity? (Score:2, Interesting)
If you like college sports, MLB or NHL then you had better choose XM. If you like NFL or NBA then you had better choose Sirius. There is no way to listen to college football and later the NFL on the same radio. This is actually a MAJOR draw back for a lot of people.
Damn You, FCC! (Score:4, Interesting)
I _really_ wish the FCC would stop trying to control markets and technologies. I can understand the issues with interference, but exactly how is a monopoly in a new and developing industry a bad thing for consumers? Isn't the first company providing services in a certain space a monopoly? Does that mean we shouldn't allow a company to come up with a new radio technology unless there's another company that's also doing it?
Being a monopoly is not evil in and of itself, it's when that monopoly uses its power to keep others out of the market that it becomes a problem. How exactly could a merger of Sirius and XM Radio keep others out of the market? It's not like they can prevent competitors from launching satellites, or buying bandwidth on someone else's satellite. Consumers will always be free to purchase a new receiver if need be.
Once again... (Score:3, Interesting)
Sat radio sattelite monopoly- hardly scary (Score:4, Interesting)
It's an optional service. No one, by any stretch of the imagination, needs to buy sattelite radio service.
If they piss off their customers, what are the customers gonna do?
STOP PAYING THEM.
That's all. Folks will listen to free broadcast radio or cd's instead. They won't starve, they won't have to dig up a precious resource themselves, and they won't have to kill someone in the streets to get their fix.
But hey, the FCC got to flex their muscle. They must be proud.
Re:Go with logic (Score:3, Interesting)
You bring up the NFL and that reminds me of another issue that is quite common. The Dish Network's stranglehold over NFL to the point where if you watch the NFL on cable you get 5-6 games a week, this is in a sporting even that has easily double that. Don't live in Boston? You're not getting the Patriots. Don't live in Green bay? You'll only see your packers a couple times a year. So who is helped out by this contract? Dish Network. Who is hurt? Everyone else.
The problem is this idea only works if Dish network has everything. Assume Cablenetworks (or Cablevision alone) is the only one with full Baseball so now when baseball season rolls around you NEED cablevision otherwise I can't see the Red Soxes, or I can't see the white soxes or what ever team is not local.
Then we get into issues of fans of both sports. How do you rectify that? You can't unless you expect them to switch networks half way through the year, of course Dish has contracts which hurts that option too.
The anti-trust is there to avoid letting the satillite radios to hurt the consumer, but once again anti-trust laws and the divisions they cause is what hurts the consumers, not the companies in this case. I don't think Sirius and XM are innocent here, I'm sure given the chance the merger will raise the cost a bit, but at the same time Sirius and XM will deliver what the fans want rather than having in-fighting to the point where no one is happy and satellite radio will just simply fail.
Hell, it's taken them almost 3 years to find ways to allow a person to buy one subscription to satillite radio and use it on all their Satillite radio devices (and even that is expensive), so implying that the anti-trust is advancing the services that they offer is just plain silly.
Re:Go with logic (and this decision shows none) (Score:3, Interesting)
The FM radio in your car can be built by anybody--the technology is essentially 'open source' in this sense. Therefore, the only income those stations have is from donations (yea, right) and by advertisers.
Just as cable has commercials (longer, more annoying) Sat radio has them too. There are many, many stations that are commercial free--but not all of them.
You are paying for a SERVICE--unfiltered, unFCC'd, unaltered content. That is the service they provide to you. You are not paying the broadcasting bills, that comes from the same source that it always has: Adverts.
Your logic defies your own self. A one-time-cost is still a cost. You are paying for it either way, it just depends on how long you keep the radio. If my radio breaks, i can buy another one for $30 and they will transfer my subscription for free. If my HD radio breaks, it's another $99 bucks.
Replace 'steal' for another angle. They don't want Sat radios, as they don't work for much longer than they can steal them. HD radios they can re-sell almost as fast as they can steal them.
But above all that, the REAL reason HD radio is a crock--It's still governed by the FCC, which means that you are no longer able to listen to the whole song/radio/talk because it isin't up to you. It's up to a suit who dosen't want to be annoyed by all the stay-at-home moms of the world who have nothing better to do than bitch about how a boob was shown on TV for nary a second, yet will defend the right to brestfeed in public.
And that my good sir, is the reason I WILLINGLY PAY for my Sat radio. I want all the music, and none of the bleeps.
hopefully this hasn't been said (Score:2, Interesting)
But what does the FCC have to say about it other than the frequency usage? If anything, merging would free up spectrum. I don't get how the FCC has any say in this whatsoever.
Re:who pays for radio (Score:3, Interesting)
" I'm amazed that anybody would shell out even a nickel for radio "
A similar argument could be made for cable or satellite television. But apparently 70+ million US cable and satellite subscribers want more TV channels then their local market provides over the air. Sure, more people enjoy television, but watching TV while commuting to work is a little dangerous not to mention illegal in many areas.
Sirius has about 135+ channels and provides a variety of different formats that are not available in my local market. I'm not a big Stern fan. I listen primarily to the dozen or so news/world/talk channels. Another thing I like is that Sirius provides two feeds (home and away) for all the NFL games.
I didn't choose Sirius over XM. The vehicle I bought new in '05 had the Siruis/Nav/CD setup and included a 12 month free subscription. When I bought it, I had no intention of continuing the service after the free 12 months. But after a year, I like it and it works for me.
People shell out money for all sorts of different things. Some want 30/5 FIOS where as others are content with dial-up. Some choose cable, some are happy with local over-the-air channels. Some choose fancy wireless data plans, and some people won't even spent money to get a cell phone. Some choose the dating scene, other choose prostitutes. Oh wait... Anyway the point is, to each his own...
Re:Yech! (Score:3, Interesting)