XM / Sirius Radio C-SPAN Hearings

[Robson]

Congressman John Conyers chaired hearings on the merger of Sirius and XM radio. Frankly I wasn't overly impressed when he appeared to fawn over Mel Karmazin at the end, I assume just because he showed up at the hearing. The impression he gave was that Mel was doing the American people a great favor by being there. The fact is Mel stands to make gobs of money over this deal and I wish that Congress, especially Democrats, would look at it that way, and act like consumer advocates and protectors of the rights of Americans instead of kissing ass to another rich influential media capitalist.

[Double T]

1. This merger should NOT be allowed to happen...........

BUT wall street's lobbyists will grease the skids and the merger approvals will sail through Congress; just one more American corporate monopoly. Can't wait till 'WE' see the new increased rate schedule for satellite radio service.

[soothsayer]

4. It should actually decrease the price, as they won't have to spend

as much to advertise against each other, and there are economies of scale to be taken advantage of. I don't think they want to kill the golden goose by jacking up rates for their loyal listeners---none of us HAVE to have satellite radio, after all.

[slj0101]

5. On the other hand,

A rate increase would give satellite radio the means to pay off the extravagant amounts of money given to Howard Stern, Martha Stewart, and Oprah Winfrey.

I'm not a fan of this. I've had both services, and I think Sirius' music programming is superior to XM. I also have a feeling that commercial interruptions on the music channels are not far behind (remember when a number of cable stations used to be commercial-free?).

[Liberal In Texas]

6. It will NOT decrease the price.

Since when has a monopoly ever decreased prices?

Just because there are other media alternatives does not mean that when XM and Sirius merge that they won't restructure to give a "nearly free" to "really expensive" alternative. Kind of like cable in your home town.

Advertising revenue is a very small part of the budget. Mostly, both have spent millions wooing Oprah (5.5 million) and Stern.

After the initial outlay of infrastructure, like putting up the satellites, now they're trying to outdo each other in programming. That's why they're losing money. They have bad business plans.

They should not be allowed to form what will be in effect a monopoly. Let them sort out not hiring "Oprah" or "Howard" and offer quality programs at lower import rates.

No, nobody needs satellite radio. Nobody needs cable TV. And really, nobody needs regular TV. But if you let a monopoly happen, you and have no competition, you are subject to what ever the corporation wants you to pay and hear (or see).

You can see this right now. Your local TV station also owns what used to be the UHF station that used to be independent. They may also own the newspaper. And 12 radio stations. And we know how good that is.

[Robson]

7. The cost of Howard Stern

Here is an interesting article on Sirius and how Howard Stern made half a billion while most shareholders were screwed royally. BTW I never invested in it so I have no axe to grind except with our lawmakers. Someone asked Mel Karmazin about whether he made a mistake to hire Howard Stern at such great expense. Of course Mel said it was a great investment.

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/SuperModels/WhySiriusIsStillDoomed.aspx?GT1=9215

[MazeRat7]

2. If they agree to the recommendations put forth by "Public Knowledge" I don't really see a problem...

The tie-up between Sirius Satellite Radio Inc. (SIRI) and XM Radio Holdings Inc. (XMSR) should be given the green light as long as the companies agree to a series of voluntary conditions and to freeze prices, Rep. Rick Boucher, D-Va., said Wednesday.

The "voluntary" conditions Rep. Boucher references are those recommended by the advocacy group Public Knowledge:

The companies would have to allow consumers to subscribe on a channel-by-channel basis or by tiered programming; they must agree to make 5% of capacity available to noncommercial, educational purposes and should agree to freeze prices for three years after the merger is complete.The companies would have to allow consumers to subscribe on a channel-by-channel basis or by tiered programming; they must agree to make 5% of capacity available to noncommercial, educational purposes and should agree to freeze prices for three years after the merger is complete.

As expected the NAB (National Association of Broadcasters) are opposed to the deal... but to expect anything else from rapacious capitalists would be silly.

MZr7

[Robson]

3. Altar of Unfettered Capitalism

Again....my impression was that Rep Conyers was bowing down at the altar of unfettered capitalism just like the GOP. They see a very rich capitalist and think that makes everything he/she says righteous and right and good for America. Instead it should be making them suspicious and ask tough questions. Rep Issa did OK. Can't say the same for Maxine Waters. Just my opinion.