What is Digg?Sponsored by HowLifeWorks
How Smart Guys Keep Their Faces Looking Young view!
howlifeworks.com - Why men have finally started to use certain anti-aging skin care products...
200 Comments
- GunbladeVIII, on 10/12/2007, -38/+98What a disaster this would be. Competition has made each service so much better. Interoperability and legal issues aside, a merger that leaves only one satellite radio company would undoubtedly leave to price increases and the death of my favorite XM channels as the two companies combine programming.
Let's hope the FCC does something good for once, and does to this plan what they did to the DirecTV/DISH Network plan: kill it. - IceBurrg, on 10/12/2007, -2/+57I can't wait for the Howard Stern vs. Opie & Anthony war. This should be fun...
- jared9985, on 10/12/2007, -4/+51Take it easy on the caps. THERE IS NO REASON TO YELL A HEADLINE.
- FilteringCraig, on 10/12/2007, -0/+47Playboy chicks = good. Playboy chicks TALKING on radio = not good.
- root1657, on 10/12/2007, -9/+51@patrickfisher
even if the companies merge with all their might, they still have to maintain 2 sets of satellites and the local transmitters for the places that have them. The hardware is not physically compatible at this time, so even if they started to merge their hardware somehow, all current sets (millions) are specification dependent.
This is one time we can say for certain, it just wont blend! - Nougat, on 10/12/2007, -2/+42That's so people on dialup can read it.
- ScornForSega, on 10/12/2007, -18/+56But there IS competition.
They're basically being forced to merge due to the emergence of free HD radio. Of course, it's not the same, but it's close enough.
Personally, I never subscribed to satellite radio 'cause I couldn't decide which service to try, so I took option C. None of the above. With a single provider where I don't have to choose between O&A vs. Howard Stern, I might actually give it a shot. - sjgmoney, on 10/12/2007, -6/+33Thumbs down for Gunblade for being dead wrong. Market forces will dictate prices, satellite radio's main competition is still "Free" radio. One could argue that the exact opposite might occur; because of the cost savings involved in merging these two companies prices might actually go down.
Certainly not having to bid against each other for NFL, baseball, NASCAR rights etc is going to improve their cost structure. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+24Also, before anyone starts hollering "ANTITRUST!!!", you have to know what antitrust legislation really does. AT legislation is NOT there to stop monopolies from forming...it's there to stop companies that are monopolies from using their monopoly power to invade and take over other markets. THAT is why Microsoft ended up in their suit. They used their de facto monopoly over the OS market to try to take over the browser market.
As for satellite radio...if this new "satellite monopoly" suddenly started buying up terrestrial stations, ala Clear Channel, then THAT would be an abuse of antitrust and would open them up for a lawsuit.
Just an FYI, people. - TheTusch, on 10/12/2007, -2/+22"Talks were still going on at press time and the deal could fall apart at any time."
Looks like the writer is trying to save himself if this all falls apart. - wvdavis, on 10/12/2007, -1/+18In other news... XM/Sirius is now the new AT&T
- ntwrkguy, on 10/12/2007, -3/+17am i really the only one who finds sirius programming to be far superior to XM when it comes to classic rock? that was the main reason i switched from XM to sirius. i was tired of hearing the same 50 classic rock songs on XM.
- wheresmysocks, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16XM confirms it.
http://xmradio.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=press_releases&item=1423 - ZakColeman, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16He is just like a paper boy in the good ol' days, EXTRA EXTRA READ ALL ABOUT IT!
- FilteringCraig, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14Management wouldn't be able to afford to let them battle for real. The merged form of this company would need both shows' audiences to be successful. I bet the relationship between Stern's channel and O&A's channel would hardly change. They will both still broadcast from separate locations. The only difference would be that you could pick up both shows with the same antenna and receiver.
- ShtrMcGavin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14I also prefer Sirius programming over XM's.
This merger has me a little nervous though because as it was previously mentioned once this happens I'm sure the rates will go up and without competition then next step will be commercials on all the channels. Then subscriptions would drop, rates go up again to compensate, both go out of business and everyone is right back where they started.
I'm probably over reacting but its still a possibility. - crycry, on 10/12/2007, -8/+21From Wikipedia (source is NYT)
January 18: The Federal Communications Commission rules that licensing regulations would prohibit a possible merger of XM and rival Sirius Satellite Radio. Recent remarks by top officials within both companies have hinted at a possible move to join forces to stave off billion-dollar losses associated with increased competition between the two services - mwhoh, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12That's terrible, I'm sorry.
- markp93, on 10/12/2007, -6/+17Should it be called SeXM ?
- theamazingkort, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14No sir, I don't like it.
I chose Sirius over XM because XM blows ass. Now I'm going to have to be subjected to XM's crap channels whether I like it or not? What kind of ***** is that? - Perno, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12This merger is confirmed on
http://abcnews.go.com - ucbmoose, on 10/12/2007, -25/+35Hoo hoo Robin, I invented satellite radio. It should be called Sternellite radio, tell 'em Fred!
- sjgmoney, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9The full comment was CURRENT regulations prohibit such a merger but they could apply for a change in those regs. The FCC will have little say in this merger, the FTC (Federal Trade Com.) will.
- 98acura, on 10/12/2007, -17/+26I uhh gotta take the uhh howie copter to the hamptons ro-bin... hoo hoo me me me me me!
- madhouseradio, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10There is a quick hack for this: Press the Channel Up or Channel Down button
When Stern was on terrestrial radio you never listened to any other station on there either?
Come now my friend...I don't stop watching TV just because American Idol is on Fox. - slapded, on 10/12/2007, -4/+13frunkus
- spitcoff, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10as some one who has had both Sirius and XM i hope they keep the Sirius content and stations which are far superior to XM
- thadiusdean, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9I'm just worried about losing my precious Left of Center on Sirius...
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+14"Think of what would happen if there were two sewage companies competing for your business. You'd have to have two sets of sewage pipes going to every house."
Bad example. In such a situation, a smart city/town/community would have bids from competing sewage companies submitted and take vote on which to go into negotiations with. Or each house could have individual sewage tanks with companies competing for installation and/or maintenance...just like it's done in smaller towns and rural communities.
The point is: comparing satellite radio to sewage companies is comparing apples to turds. :P - FrankieB078, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10Combine companies? Can XM. We don't need them.
Hi my name is FrankieB078 and I'm a Sirius Fanboy. - dree, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Yeah, you definitely have that analogy backwards...
[my opinion] XM's music content is more generic. [/my opinion] - razrielle, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Playboy radio, I feel, is the dumbed down version of love line
- dTOWNbaby, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7I really find it hard to see how this can all be good for consumers. I have Sirius and fully stand behind it as the better product. Many XM subscribers are equally passionate about their programming choices. It'd be cool if they just "merged" both companies stations effectively doubling the channel selection for subscribers of both services.
Realistically, each station is going to cut there lineup in half before the merge. I've grown to have a certain familiarity with the personalities and program lineups on my music stations (as close as it'll ever be to the stations I used to listen to in FM) and it would kind of suck to start over AGAIN. Plus I've never known one company being the only provider of any service to be a good thing. The day the "100% commercial free music" statement is no longer applicable, I walk. - Perno, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9XM was the one that came out with the lower price initially, so that would probably put them in the "Wal-Mart" category. I wonder which one you have, XM-Fanboy. I've only had XM in my life and I cancelled it since the content was poor, and that was when it was only $10/mo.
- mjrjr, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9I have a feeling I'm going to get hosed with the $500 lifetime subscription I bought for Sirius a year ago.
- codyman, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9Good thing they used all caps because otherwise I would have never believed it
- Perno, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Yes. You don't?
- Phearce, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Agreed. I picked Sirius over XM about a year ago. I could care less about Stern -- I listen to the music. In my region (Upstate NY) the regular radio sucks. I'm in between two markets at HDradio.com, but best case I can receive fewer than 10 channels, offering up such gems as Country, Christian, Spanish, Urban, and Jazz. That's it.
This is about content, not format. As a consumer I want options. In my region regular radio and HD radio just aren't cutting it. - Yorn, on 10/12/2007, -8/+14Government interference is ALWAYS bad. This is the reason why multi-billion dollar companies grip the government and use it to thwart competition, because agencies like the FCC step in and try to make arguments about competition. Competition is inherent unless you provide the companies with a means to stop it, for example, by establishing a government entity that is staffed by individuals who are picked from elected officials and giving that entity the discretion of choosing what minimums and maximums there are to compete in a specific industry. It's bureacracy at its finest, and it's what AT&T learned as soon as the government started f'ing with it.
Companies that get regulated by the government have a very direct incentive to control the government, which is why they invest so much money in lobbying, politicians, and etc. The US is a great place for corporations to control their markets and to prevent their customers (ie, us) from having true alternatives, all they have to do is give the public the guise that their vote matters, there is no such thing as an oligopoly, and that regulation is a great thing. Which of the three did you fall for? - jpb0104, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8I love Sirius and want MLB. Could be good for me.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+12untrue gunblade, they still have to compete with terrestrial radio. If satellite radio gets out of hand, people will drop them in droves.
- Phearce, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7@theseanmann66 -- you have no idea what you're talking about, fanboy. Take a look at the car manufacturers exclusively partnered with Sirius: http://www.sirius.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=Sirius/CachedPage&c=Page&cid=1019257316845
Example: Aston-Martin, Daimler-Chrysler, BMW. - gregmo, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8This is just a bad idea from a consumer's standpoint
- Buelldozer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Good catch, I thought I remembered something about the FCC blocking this deal. Frankly I think that they SHOULD merge, it sure would be nice to have one operating standard for the two services.
Of course this will just make it EASIER for Satellite Radio to be controlled by Clear Channel and to meet the same fate as terrestrial radio - too many commercials, crappy bland programming, etc. - walt1028, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9ramone
- ScareCrow87, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6I"ve been a happy XM subscriber since it's inception. However, had I realized that Siirus had the NFL contract when I picked up my XM (and locked in 5 years of service), I would probably gone that route. MLB is okay (and a great deal for XM subscribers who are heavy into baseball), but I've spent many a Sunday afternoon on the road wishing I could pick up a game!
- Bacchanal, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I don't see why not. It fell apart a couple months ago. And no matter what happens in negotiation, the FCC can still come in and put the hammer down on the whole deal, anyway.
- g30ph, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Playboy radio is dumb. You can't see their *****.
- joel8x, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5O&A have an upper hand in negotiations in this deal as they have jobs on regular radio to fall back on, as well as being the most listened to channel on XM. The only problem is that Mel Karmazin is an napoleon complexed a-hole who hates them, and will do anything Howard Stern says. This will be interesting to say the least, but I'm not happy about the prospect of having "premium channels" again, which is hinted at in the XM press release. I hope this gets squashed.
- Muyoso, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8@ g30ph
Do you listen to Howard Stern? He has mentioned them several times since he went to satellite. Also, being a former fan of Howard Stern and a current and lifelong fan of Opie and Anthony, I can tell you why one is funnier than the other. Howard Stern was the most hilarious thing on radio, until his divorce. Once he lost his wife, his show went WAY downhill. He still had his funny moments, but it turned into nothing but sex related "shock" material. He because so phony and so monotone, that his show was almost boring to listen to. O&A have a lot more going for them, they are younger, they have Jim Norton who is hilarious, they are innovative. Then Howard Stern copies them and he claims he is the first to do the things. He is the first to go to satellite radio? He is the first to introduce video cameras into the studio and stream them online? Basically, the reason I like O&A and dislike Howard, is because Howard thinks SOOOO much of himself, while O&A know they are just a couple of douchebags like the rest of us and mention it almost everyday. -
Show 51 - 100 of 200 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is