-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
Merger Update!!!
- Thread starter agentUrge
- Start date
i think that merger is now pretty much inevitable. i am now VERY interested in getting one now. so the question is which one should i go with, sirius or xm? if i have followed the process correctly, sirius is taking over xm. so does that mean that sirius will be the format that will survive on its current equipment or should i feel fairly confident that there will be xm radios picking up the xm signal, sirius radios picking up the sirius signal and that both signals simply will just be the same one formatted for the specific equipment?
CTK, as I understand it, you should be able to get both's programming on either service's current receivers. In essence, Sirius will be heard on an Inno and XM channels on an XACT. Did I make that as clear as mud? ;D
Rockin Rob said:
Rob...
I don't think that is quite right...In order to save money it is true that the new Sirius will eliminate duplicate programming. No need to program two 50s type channels or two Sinatra type channels or two Classic Country channels and so on...
But it is unlikely you will hear Oprah or Major League baseball on your XACT or NFL or NASCAR on your Inno. Boils down to bandwidth. There is not enough of it to squeeze all the XM and Sirius channels on both services.
Both systems are not compatible. Your Inno can not pick up and decode the Sirius satellites and your XACT can not pick up and decode the XM satellites. That is because they are in two different parts of the satellite frequency spectrum and use two different coding systems. FCC will not allow the new Sirius to render one type of receiver obsolete so they will have to operate both systems separately until legacy receivers flush themselves out of service.
Sooner or later a dual band receiver will be made available but Mel himself said nobody would be willing to pay what they would cost.
Also keep in mind there is talk that the Commission is going to place conditions on the merger. One of those conditions is rumored to be giving up a certain amount of spectrum to a 3rd party to program minority or public service type programming. That percentage is said to be anywhere from 5 to 20 percent of each service. That would mean even less bandwidth for the sharing of XM and Sirius programming...
Testing123
i think (hope, because i just put in an order for a stilletto sl100) what will happen is duplicate programming goes away and the unique items stay on. i can see all of xm's music channels and traffic and weather stations being dropped. by my count, that's at least 120 channels. xm has according to wikipedia 187 channels and sirius has 134. i think that sirius can add on an additional 50 stations to its lineup (i have not done an intensive look at the channel listings for both, i'm sure that some of the channels are similar for both) so in a way rob may be correct. xm programming will be heard on sirius equipment and sirius programming will be heard on xm equipment. it's just that it all will be an amalgamation of both lineups streamed on both players.
ctk
That is not how it will work...
http://investor.sirius.com/ReleaseDetail.cfm?ReleaseID=255847
Mel says you will receive certain XM or Sirius programming. Not all XM and Sirius programming. Your price per month will also being going up in this case to $16.99 a month.
Test123
That is not how it will work...
http://investor.sirius.com/ReleaseDetail.cfm?ReleaseID=255847
Mel says you will receive certain XM or Sirius programming. Not all XM and Sirius programming. Your price per month will also being going up in this case to $16.99 a month.
Test123
not exactly test. and i have to wonder openly whether or not you are for or against this merger, because it clearly says in the press release that there will be mulitple alacarte options being created as well as current subscriptions not changing any. you will be able to choose from 50 sirius/xm channels for 6.99 or 100 sirius/xm channels for 14.99 with $.25 for each additional channel. subscriptions will range from 6.99 to 16.99 but they will not BE 16.99.
looks like what's going to happen is going to be very loosely what i speculated. the redundant channels don't go away, but both offerings will be available for both recievers.
looks like what's going to happen is going to be very loosely what i speculated. the redundant channels don't go away, but both offerings will be available for both recievers.
I would be against the merger. I have a number of reasons.
#1. Competition is a good thing. Having two satcasters means more options for consumers and lower prices. I have read on many different message boards that Sirius is better than XM and XM is better than Sirius. If the Commission approves the merger you won't have a choice. I don't think the iPod and terrestrial radio are true competition for the satcasters. There is programming available only on satellite. You can't listen to a Dallas Cowboys football game on a terrestrial station in Boston. You can on Sirius.
#2. I don't trust Mel Karmazin. I think he is a slick salesman that will say whatever he has to turn the order. I don't believe they ever plan to offer this a la carte plan. The only way it works is if you can buy a dual band radio that Mel himself said would be so expensive nobody would buy one...
#3. It is against the law. The FCC said no one company can own both SDARS licenses. It is true that the FCC can change this rule. One could argue that if they allow this to happen why not allow Clear Channel or CBS to own all of the stations in a market. No one would want that to happen but that is basically what the Commission would be doing if they allow Sirius to own both licenses.
Truth is we really don't know what is going to happen. It could be exactly like the press release says. They may be cranking out a la carte receivers as we speak. The new Sirius may be the best thing since sliced bread...I'm not so sure...
t123
#1. Competition is a good thing. Having two satcasters means more options for consumers and lower prices. I have read on many different message boards that Sirius is better than XM and XM is better than Sirius. If the Commission approves the merger you won't have a choice. I don't think the iPod and terrestrial radio are true competition for the satcasters. There is programming available only on satellite. You can't listen to a Dallas Cowboys football game on a terrestrial station in Boston. You can on Sirius.
#2. I don't trust Mel Karmazin. I think he is a slick salesman that will say whatever he has to turn the order. I don't believe they ever plan to offer this a la carte plan. The only way it works is if you can buy a dual band radio that Mel himself said would be so expensive nobody would buy one...
#3. It is against the law. The FCC said no one company can own both SDARS licenses. It is true that the FCC can change this rule. One could argue that if they allow this to happen why not allow Clear Channel or CBS to own all of the stations in a market. No one would want that to happen but that is basically what the Commission would be doing if they allow Sirius to own both licenses.
Truth is we really don't know what is going to happen. It could be exactly like the press release says. They may be cranking out a la carte receivers as we speak. The new Sirius may be the best thing since sliced bread...I'm not so sure...
t123
satellite radio is in competition with terrestrial radio. i won't even go as far as some people saying that mp3 players are also competition. i don't buy that. what's going on here is not one company competing with another but it has been really one company competing with the other AND your local radio stations. if both companies went after each other's kneecaps, satellite radio is worse off because the ultimate victor has either priced out customers or put itself in such a hole, it may be not viable for that remaining company to stay in business. by merging, both companies as one will be taking on terrestrial radio directly. and right now terrestrial radio is at a very low point.
i own an hd radio. i am very dissapointed with it. no, not because it makes everything sound better and its the strongest radio that i own so it can pick up far away signals and weak signals in town, but because 1) there are very little offerings with side channels from those stations that do have hd signals where i am. i know of 4 hd side channels in louisville out of 8 hd stations. we are also awaiting the start of another hd channel for 8 or 9 months now. of those 4 stations with a side channel all of them only offer 1 side channel and 3 of them are preprogrammed feeds coming centrally from clear channel. what was on one of those stations that was replaced was live concert cuts. replacing locally produced streams for the same preprogrammed dreck that's on the main stations. there's a real improvement over satellite radio.
you are coming from a perception of all markets havng variety. this one doesn't have much of that anymore. satellite radio is an improvement because i get more of the stuff that i prefer to listen to on one service.
i will now await your response as to how only one satellite company existing that will offer college sports, hockey, the chicago cubs, and nonconservoblather in a southern town nowhere near hockey, in the middle of reds country on the edge of f'ing cardinal country, on the edge of the bible belt is not a good thing. i have a choice between local stuff and satellite stuff. last time i checked, that's not a monopoly.
i own an hd radio. i am very dissapointed with it. no, not because it makes everything sound better and its the strongest radio that i own so it can pick up far away signals and weak signals in town, but because 1) there are very little offerings with side channels from those stations that do have hd signals where i am. i know of 4 hd side channels in louisville out of 8 hd stations. we are also awaiting the start of another hd channel for 8 or 9 months now. of those 4 stations with a side channel all of them only offer 1 side channel and 3 of them are preprogrammed feeds coming centrally from clear channel. what was on one of those stations that was replaced was live concert cuts. replacing locally produced streams for the same preprogrammed dreck that's on the main stations. there's a real improvement over satellite radio.
you are coming from a perception of all markets havng variety. this one doesn't have much of that anymore. satellite radio is an improvement because i get more of the stuff that i prefer to listen to on one service.
i will now await your response as to how only one satellite company existing that will offer college sports, hockey, the chicago cubs, and nonconservoblather in a southern town nowhere near hockey, in the middle of reds country on the edge of f'ing cardinal country, on the edge of the bible belt is not a good thing. i have a choice between local stuff and satellite stuff. last time i checked, that's not a monopoly.
First...sorry for the triple post. No idea how that happened...
I guess I am not understanding your point. I am saying satellite radio is not in direct competition with terrestrial radio. I am not saying terrestrial radio is better than satellite radio. I think they are different. There are things you can get on terrestrial radio that you can not get on satellite radio and vise versa.
I don't think we can say terrestrial radio is competition and MP3 players are not. DOJ's argument is just that. They said terrestrial radio, iPods, CD's, Internet Radio, Satellite TV, Technics SL1200s, Cassette Tapes and Reel to Reel tape recorders are competition. Anything that you can listen to is competition to the satcasters...
The two satcasters are in competition with one another. The merger makes a monopoly. That is not a good thing.
I agree that not allowing the merger puts one or both satcasters in a bad economic situation. There is no way to know if allowing the merger saves them either.
In order for the new Sirius to offer sports programming they have to pay for it. For whatever reason the two satcasters overpaid for every sports property they air. The new Sirius is not going to want to offer to pay the same price that they have been paying. The NFL and MLB and NASCAR put a very high value on their product. They are not going to want to be paid less than they are now especially if they are going to be aired on both services. Good chance some of that programming will go away.
We can bring that back around to Mel. When he was still at Infinity he did his best to get out of paying rights fees for sports programming. I am sure he will try to do the same thing at the new Sirius.
I completely agree with you on HD Radio. It is a bust on many levels.
t123
I guess I am not understanding your point. I am saying satellite radio is not in direct competition with terrestrial radio. I am not saying terrestrial radio is better than satellite radio. I think they are different. There are things you can get on terrestrial radio that you can not get on satellite radio and vise versa.
I don't think we can say terrestrial radio is competition and MP3 players are not. DOJ's argument is just that. They said terrestrial radio, iPods, CD's, Internet Radio, Satellite TV, Technics SL1200s, Cassette Tapes and Reel to Reel tape recorders are competition. Anything that you can listen to is competition to the satcasters...
The two satcasters are in competition with one another. The merger makes a monopoly. That is not a good thing.
I agree that not allowing the merger puts one or both satcasters in a bad economic situation. There is no way to know if allowing the merger saves them either.
In order for the new Sirius to offer sports programming they have to pay for it. For whatever reason the two satcasters overpaid for every sports property they air. The new Sirius is not going to want to offer to pay the same price that they have been paying. The NFL and MLB and NASCAR put a very high value on their product. They are not going to want to be paid less than they are now especially if they are going to be aired on both services. Good chance some of that programming will go away.
We can bring that back around to Mel. When he was still at Infinity he did his best to get out of paying rights fees for sports programming. I am sure he will try to do the same thing at the new Sirius.
I completely agree with you on HD Radio. It is a bust on many levels.
t123
you're looking at this as two businesses merging that provided the same service. i'm looking at this as two businesses becoming one to provide a form of live distribution combining to take on another form of live distribution. my belief has always been that commercial satellite radio was started to provide an alternative to terrestrial radio. that's why i have no problem with this merger.
comparitively speaking if the two major satv companies directv and dishtv announced a merger, i wouldn't have a problem with that either. its one form of information distribution (satellite television) taking on two other forms of information distribution (terrestrial cable and over-the-air tv). and even then a claim of monopoly is specious at best because there are other satellite tv operations in existance that cater to a specific demographic.
comparitively speaking if the two major satv companies directv and dishtv announced a merger, i wouldn't have a problem with that either. its one form of information distribution (satellite television) taking on two other forms of information distribution (terrestrial cable and over-the-air tv). and even then a claim of monopoly is specious at best because there are other satellite tv operations in existance that cater to a specific demographic.
johnnyu said:
Do you pay for TV to get better quality programming? What's so bad about paying for radio to get better programming. Maybe you like the same overplayed songs on terrestrial radio but some of us like more choice. In the market I live, there is not much of a choice in formats. SIRIUS and XM offer formats that terrestrial either can't or won't offer. Even the top forty and main stream county formats on both services have a deeper play list than what is offered on their terrestrial counter parts.
My wife was one of those, "I'll never pay for radio" people. Than she heard SIRIUS when it was added to Dish Network. A few months later we became SIRIUS subscribers and we love th service. So to borrow an old saying, "never say never" You might want to try it first before you jump to the, "I'll never pay for radio" conclusion.
I am one who's looking forward to the merger and the possibility of a la carte programming. I'm just a little curious about the forthcoming devices to get the a la carte. Both companies have dash mounted receivers in their respective automotive deals, so either an external device or recall/replacement would have to be coming. I'd like to get an idea of what company is going to be manufacturing the upgrades or new units. I made a couple of dollars on the Stern exodus, sounds like a money maker on the way. After all....it's ALWAYS about the money.. ;D
simonbarrsinister said:
From what I read, once this merger takes place, your current receiver will become compatible with the other's services, making an interim replacement receiver not necessary. Of course, if they slap on the CC recommendation of "must carry" for HD Radio, that goes off the table (I believe) and would make a new receiver an absolute. But remember, CC's recommendations are just that.
Rockin Rob said:
http://www.tulsaworld.com/business/article.aspx?articleID=20080327_5_E3_BERAs12636
According to this article, subscribers of one service will be able to receive "select programming" from the other service, on their existing radios. The companies did not say whether this "select programming" would include "popular programming" (e.g., Howard Stern, MLB).
They plan to offer eight options of combined XM/Sirius channels, including a "mostly music" package (65 channels, $9.95/month). Six of the eight will be available on existing radios (shortly after merger approval)
The article also notes that one option will be 50 channels at $6.99/month and additional channels 25 cents each, "though premium choices, such as the NFL channel, would cost $3 or $6 each per month."
I haven't located any article spelling out the eight options...... Does anyone know if one of those options would be to keep your current level of service at the current price of 12.99?MHB said:
I am very satisfied with what I have and don't want to pay less for less channels or more money for more channels.
I'm also curious how this would affect Siruis Canada and XM Canada subscribers, since both XM and Sirius in Canada are regulated by the CRTC.
sirius canada and xm canada would continue to exist as seperate entities because the situation is different there. xmc has a bigger share of the recievers and they see merging with sirius canada would be bailing out a competitor.
however because both xm and sirius own a big percentage of their canadian counterparts the two companies could be seperate canadian companies however they would be owned by the same company.
however because both xm and sirius own a big percentage of their canadian counterparts the two companies could be seperate canadian companies however they would be owned by the same company.
- Status