• 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

Sirius-Xm merger Approved, sorry terrestrial

Just curious, how many of you who support this merger have railed against consolidation in radio? If you have, what makes you think consolidation of the satellite providers will somehow produce the opposite results of radio consolidation?

Personally, I think the merger is a terrible deal for subscribers. I don't see how it can result in anything other than higher costs, fewer choices, more commercials and poorer programming in every definition of the term. However, I don't think it's going to have much of an impact on terrestrial radio, and I don't see it as being a huge deal. After all, if they raise their prices, get rid of some of the channels I like and/or clutter my favorite channels with spots, I'll fire them.
 
tifchase said:
I have stock in both XM and Sirius. I'm fine with this merger.

Wow...I feel very sorry for you. I hope you either bought a very long time ago, or last week. And I hope you sell at the first opportunity.

Because the minute anyone looks at their books, this stock is heading down the drain.

I consider myself lucky, and I only lost $5K.
 
The XM was purchased as a gift when it first went public. I believe it cost about 30 cents a share. The sirius stock was a great price too so no worries here.
 
Questions:

Whey do they need to charge so much for subscription? Why not just flood the channels with spots, like terrestrial radio? I understand some of the appeal is less commercials but you can get commercial free with an ipod. Isn't the variety of channels supposed to be the main appeal?

Thanks.
 
5410 said:
Questions:

Whey do they need to charge so much for subscription? Why not just flood the channels with spots, like terrestrial radio? I understand some of the appeal is less commercials but you can get commercial free with an ipod. Isn't the variety of channels supposed to be the main appeal?

Thanks.

You can't get the variety of channels with ad-supported radio. That's why it doesn't happen on terrestrial.

Ad-supported media aims for highest audiences. You can't do that with most of the niche channels on satellite. So if advertising comes in, say goodbye to variety.
 
NealH said:
Satellite isn't 1/10th the threat to terrestrial radio that iPods and Internet Radio are.

Unless Mel can drastically reduce the cost per subscriber and retain people after the free trial ends, satellite is still a novelty technology that's losing cash hand over fist. How many Billions, to date, have XM and Sirius lost combined?

As far as the new music channels, we have XM on our DirecTV and XM's CHR playlist rotation is just as tight as, if not tighter than, KHKS. They rotate their hottest currents about every 90 minutes.

Why pay $10 or more a month when you can get a high-end iPod for around $200 and it'll store all the songs you've ever wanted (and then some) on it. You wanna hear "Flashlight," you dial it up. No need to wait until the 24/7 satellite station plays it.

All that's really missing from an iPod that you can hook to your car stereo is weather alerts and I wouldn't be surprised if they integrate weather radio into an iPod soon (if they haven't already).

I'll pay the $200 for an iPod that I have control over before I cede any money to a satellite provider.

That's the telling post within this threat. I have both Sirius (Ford) and XM (other car) and IPods in both cars. One is mine and one is the wife's. I listen more to my IPOD when I want to hear music. I have 650 songs programmed in all the genres I like as does my wife in her car. I listen to Stern on Sirius and change to the IPOD (just a button on the Ford media console) when he goes to commercial breaks. Terrestrial only comes into play when I want to listen to Rush, Rome, Hannity or one of the local sports talk show guys on AM.

I believe the odd one out will be terrestrial AS WE KNOW IT. It won't go away, but will have to reinvent itself with local ownership.
 
adguy said:
I believe the odd one out will be terrestrial AS WE KNOW IT. It won't go away, but will have to reinvent itself with local ownership.

I don't understand the issue with local ownership. That was never an issue in the history of radio.

And if the majority of local radio you listen to are national hosts, what's the point of local ownership?
 
A well run locally owned radio station can be well balanced by having a well known national host for credibility, but can surround that national host with good local talent that would be unencumbered by the corporate sensors. In other words, having local host that can let loose without being scripted as CC and the other corp owners have done over the past 12 years to the local personalities on their stations.
 
TheBigA said:
I don't understand the issue with local ownership. That was never an issue in the history of radio.

It became an issue, after deregulation in 1996.
 
TheBigA said:
Dndsh237 said:
TheBigA said:
I don't understand the issue with local ownership. That was never an issue in the history of radio.

It became an issue, after deregulation in 1996.

Then you haven't studied the history of radio.

Excuse me? I have been in radio since the mid 1980s. Radio back then was much, much better than it is today.
 
If in the long run they can use a single satellite to transmit both XM & Sirius signals, that would cut a ton off of their future costs. One would do the job of two.

They could have 3 up there tops for full North America coverage & redundancy. A lot better than 8 or so that are up there now for both services, flying different kinds of orbits.

Only time I listen to terrestrial is when I want to hear local talk. Otherwise I am hit with 20 minute commercial breaks & lousy music choices. The merger should be a good thing.
 
Dndsh237 said:
Excuse me? I have been in radio since the mid 1980s. Radio back then was much, much better than it is today.

Well junior, I've been in it since 1969. I hope you last as long in this field as I have.
 
adguy said:
In other words, having local host that can let loose without being scripted as CC and the other corp owners have done over the past 12 years to the local personalities on their stations.

That hasn't been my experience. The owners have way too much to do than to write scripts for local hosts. With management running as many as five stations in a market, they simply don't have time to meddle in what a host has to say. They usually find out about it when a listener complains.

In fact, the major companies are the ones who have been burned by local hosts. Maybe you heard of Imus, Bubba, Star, and a few others. CBS, Entercom, Clear Channel, and Emmis have all been cited for things their hosts have said. Imus had it in his contract that he was not to have any company interference in what he said.

So this sounds like another one of those radio myths.
 
Interesting that you mention Bubba. Stern was certainly the king of "burned by local hosts". Both Stern and Bubba are now flourishing unencumbered by censorship on Satellite. What I meant by "scripted" was "closely watched" and I was referring more to voice tracking across multiple markets on multiple stations in some markets. There is so much restriction to content by the corp owners that creativity has virtually gone out the window. If you want to hear creativity you need to listen to some of the talk on satellite. Lots of original thinking, great comedy bits and.....well the way it was referred to as great radio back in the 80's as previously mentioned on this thread. The FCC has also put the kabash on creativity forcing terrestrial stations to monitor every word their hosts blurt out. Censorship has run amock since the 04 Superbowl incident and the rampant onslaught of right wing conservatism. For the record I love the right wing conservative shows of Rush, Hannity and even Savage. I don't agree with everything they say, but they are entertaining. I do believe they have had an influence on this rampant censorship that Stern so vehemently railed against. Bottom line as I digress is censorship and the controlling powers of large corporate ownership has dulled terrestrial radio so much that it has given rise to the creative content of Satellite and the perpetuation of the IPOD.

It's going to be interesting now to see the battle on the three fronts: terrestrial, IPOD and satellite. As I mentioned in an earlier post on this thread, terrestrial will have to reinvent itself with local ownership, smaller budgets and smaller revenues. It will be good for them. You'll see local owners with a real interest in their station in that one market. They will let content rule and get the best they can afford. What you might see is promising new talent farmed locally that will gradually move to the national scene from local markets like DFW and Houston.

Revenues are dropping like big hail across the terrestrial radio landscape. And, its happening in TV as well. Between the expansion of the cable universe, the Internet, IPODS, Sat radio, HD radio, mandatory DT TV, the revenue pie will be cut into many smaller pieces. The revenue available to the traditional radio and TV mediums will NEVER be as big as it once was. Combine that with the dramatic ad spending reductions among the automotive manufacturers and airlines (typically 30-40% of station revenue) and you'll see massive station selloffs by their big corp owners like CBS, NBC, Newscorp. Declining revenues are no different than losses to them. Who will snap them up? Smaller local and regional owners that have a different mindset on revenue. The rumors are already out there about NBC selling off all their owned TV stations, CBS selling their radio stations, and now Newscorp (Fox) selling off all their stations except NY, LA and Chi. Change is coming. Watch out.
 
adguy said:
NealH said:
Satellite isn't 1/10th the threat to terrestrial radio that iPods and Internet Radio are.

Unless Mel can drastically reduce the cost per subscriber and retain people after the free trial ends, satellite is still a novelty technology that's losing cash hand over fist. How many Billions, to date, have XM and Sirius lost combined?

As far as the new music channels, we have XM on our DirecTV and XM's CHR playlist rotation is just as tight as, if not tighter than, KHKS. They rotate their hottest currents about every 90 minutes.

Why pay $10 or more a month when you can get a high-end iPod for around $200 and it'll store all the songs you've ever wanted (and then some) on it. You wanna hear "Flashlight," you dial it up. No need to wait until the 24/7 satellite station plays it.

All that's really missing from an iPod that you can hook to your car stereo is weather alerts and I wouldn't be surprised if they integrate weather radio into an iPod soon (if they haven't already).

I'll pay the $200 for an iPod that I have control over before I cede any money to a satellite provider.

That's the telling post within this threat. I have both Sirius (Ford) and XM (other car) and IPods in both cars. One is mine and one is the wife's. I listen more to my IPOD when I want to hear music. I have 650 songs programmed in all the genres I like as does my wife in her car. I listen to Stern on Sirius and change to the IPOD (just a button on the Ford media console) when he goes to commercial breaks. Terrestrial only comes into play when I want to listen to Rush, Rome, Hannity or one of the local sports talk show guys on AM.

I believe the odd one out will be terrestrial AS WE KNOW IT. It won't go away, but will have to reinvent itself with local ownership.



THAT worked well when CC tried Lonestar
 
adguy said:
What I meant by "scripted" was "closely watched" and I was referring more to voice tracking across multiple markets on multiple stations in some markets.

Voice-tracking isn't scripted or controlled. At least in the markets I study. Hosts are encouraged to make the show as personal as possible. The only difference between a voicetracked show and a live show is you don't have to wait for the record to end. Otherwise, you're doing what you do, and you can focus on your performance. Your performance is what you make it. PDs and OMs don't have time to micromanage their talent. They have a lot more freedom to do what they want, without sitting in the PD's office after the show for a post-mortem. No one ever told Stern what to do, and he didn't leave CBS for satellite because of management. He left because of the FCC. Big difference.

The idea of voicing a show for another market is a huge opportunity for air talent. They get paid extra, they get heard by more people, and they can do what they enjoy, which is be on the air. It's a whole lot better than the old days, when more than a third of the stations in the country were automated, running pre-recorded reel to reel tapes.

adguy said:
Declining revenues are no different than losses to them. Who will snap them up? Smaller local and regional owners that have a different mindset on revenue. The rumors are already out there about NBC selling off all their owned TV stations, CBS selling their radio stations, and now Newscorp (Fox) selling off all their stations except NY, LA and Chi. Change is coming. Watch out.

They're selling out to other big media companies. The Washington Post is buying up some NBC TV stations. And because of stupid cross-ownership laws, local newspapers can't buy local broadcasting. Otherwise, that would be a great thing for both industries. WGN has been #1 in Chicago for years despite a parade of new owners at Tribune. Why can't that model work in other cities? Because the FCC and Congress think concrentration of media is a bad thing. Yet they just created the #2 radio company in America by allowing the merger of XM & Sirius. If consolidation and concentration of media is bad, why is this merger good?
 
The merger is a good thing because without the merger both companies would have most likely gone under. Competition is no longer just between stations, it's now between mediums. Congress and the FCC eventually did the right thing by allowing a new medium to compete with the other new and traditional mediums.

Large companies, particularly newspaper companies, will buy some station groups in some markets. Newspapers are dying and before the big ones go they need to diversify by buying electronic media when and where they can. I was making the point that when the major corps with the large property holdings sell there will be a few properties that go to individuals and small group owners that will make a more flexible environment that will bring creativity back we all hope. As to voice-tracking, you said that it gave opportunities for more money to radio personalities. What it really did was cut costs for the operators. Those cuts included many jobs that the voice trackers put on the unemployment line. Look, in the day (let's go back to the 80's) there were many more gainfully employed personalities, board ops, camera operators at TV stations, etc.... Today, there are a large percentage of fewer jobs. Many were displaced by technology, which is understanding. Other jobs were lost and with them many creative minds and some potentially great talent. All I'm hoping for is a reversal of fortune for as many displaced media folks as possible. I left my cushy media job about 8 years ago for my own businesses that I have since created. I left because of what was happening in the industry with consolodation. I was no longer enjoying the business and I always maintained that the day that happened I was leaving. I did. In my heyday, it was the greatest field in the world in my opinion. Money was good, but the fun and enjoyment was spectacular. If there is a way to recapture any of that magic, I'm all for it!
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom