XM + Sirius = Monopoly

[kjallen]

So, the NAB has launched a new website: http://xmsiriusmonopoly.org. The header proudly reads:

“XM + Sirius = Monopoly”
“A merged entity could raise fees, limit programming choices and be harmful to consumers.”

The tag line is a real scream. If all of those things do happen, wouldn’t it be a good thing for the NAB lobby and commercial radio? If the NAB really bought into its own rhetoric, they would be supporting the merger. Maybe, just maybe, the NAB isn’t really in it for the consumer. Just a thought.

Let’s say the tag line is right. The new merged company raises the monthly rates from $12 per month to $50 per month and eliminates a huge chunk of their programming. Wouldn’t you think they would lose one or two subscribers? It seems that both companies are scrambling for as many subs as possible, even inflating their numbers now including units in cars that have not even been activated yet.

It seems that what would be bad for the consumer is if the tens of millions of dollars of satellite radio equipment purchased by the consumers, becomes useless because both companies cease operation. If a consumer makes the decision to pay for something that we terrestrial broadcasters are offering for free, maybe we should look at our own business and see why. Maybe eight minute stopsets and cookie-cutter formats are just not doing it anymore.

While satellite radio picks up a little steam, IPODs and other portable devices pick up a lot of steam; the NAB is finding new ways to spend money (fueled by NAB members) to create crybaby lawsuits to stop the mean satellite companies from airing local traffic and advertising campaigns to stop the merger. My favorite investment was the PSA’s from music stars talking about how great free radio is. Let me make sure I am clear on this… most listeners will tell you that commercials are annoying, and the way to fight non-commercial competitive media sources is by adding another commercial to the mix? hmmmm

If the only way we can beat our competition is by whining, complaining, and suing; then we have real problems with our industry. Suck it up, do better radio, and win.

KJ Allen
Terrestrial radio operator/Non-NAB Member (now banned for life from the NAB)

 

[SalesWeasel]

Boo hoo, NAB. We don't want to improve our own product and outdated business model so we'll sue our competitors. Waaaahhh...wahhhhh...

 

[Nate Wesley]

Boo hoo, NAB. We don't want to improve our own product and outdated business model so we'll sue our competitors. Waaaahhh...wahhhhh...

Dear SalesWeasel,

We fail to understand what's so wrong about such a strategy.

Sincerely,
The RIAA

 

[al_atl]

KJ and Sales Weasel, I couldn't agree more. Well said.

 

[taylorengineer]

The NAB is populated with too many people who do not understand the fundamentals of the radio business model.(As is radio, in general.)
Entertainment companies can not be explained, or governed, by a balance sheet. YES, profits and losses are THE bottom line but how you get there is more ART than science.
All the research and auditorium testing in the world will not help if the programmers do not have a deep understanding of what the average bear wants from radio(that goes for ANY product!)
To fully understand and appreciate the incompetance....look at the HD Radio debacle.
Now, here's a business(radio) whose main mission is to sell advertising. They tell other businesses that they will formulate a campaign which will increase the listening public's awareness and desire for their product or service. Radio goes around telling other businesses that they are experts at that.
But has radio been successful at building awareness and desire for their own product(HD Radio?) Do YOU know ANYONE who has a HD Radio....has ANYONE (not in radio) EVER asked you "just what's the deal with this HD Radio?"
A business group which can't even successfully promote it's own self interest is doomed! We need a wholesale change in management, at the corperate levels, in broadcast groups.
And you know what??Maybe you SHOULD start listening to the damned engineers more! The engineer programmed HD2 stations are usually far better than the "programming" programmed ones.....

 

[XM RADIO]

Give it a rest, after all the years of commercials on terrestrial,, XM and Sirius should have their way, gee whiz , I really dont care if its 25.00 a month, its worth every nickel, where are you going to hear Norm n nite and Cousin Brucie? Personally i have ...................................
3 Sirius
4 XM s
its manditory I not listen to 12 commercials and one song and some stupid traffic report!! Kenny in Concord California

 

[XM RADIO]

Wolfman Jack on XM is out of sight, @ 12.95 a month its 44 cents a day, thats easy, I rented a car from AVIS, last month Glad i took my XM Sportcaster,, Arizona and Vegas have nothing to compare with XM or Sirius!!!! Kenny In Concord

 

[amlover]

The NAB does seem to mind that their is a monopoly of terrestrial radio. The NAB can kick and scream all they want but the fact of the matter is that the NAB does not matter anymore. It's too LATE! I have XM and love it. Terrestrial radio is not important to people anymore and HD is also dead before it get's off the ground.

 

[SalesWeasel]

I like music -- what I want, when I want to hear it -- and I don't mind talented air talent. As of right now I'm only a Sirius subscriber, which I generally turn off so I can listen to the Steve Show or Margot.

 

[BDBopper]

Anyone find it interesting that the NAB site in opposition has nowhere to fire back at them via a "Contact Us" link while the XM/Sirius sites in support of the merger do?

I am rooting for the merger. In fact I have already written the FCC in support. If they reject the merger I am taking all the normal radios/stereos/etc that I have and burning them

 

[Twitch]

... and HD is also dead before it get's off the ground.

Now wait a second...that's not true at all! All 6 people who have HD radio in Atlanta absolutley LOVE IT. And you think it's DEAD...pshaw....


BTW, why is this topic in the Atlanta section?

 

[middlega]

... our competition ...

Tell you what ... put 'em under the same rules that broadcast has to abide by & I'll gladly switch my position on their merger from "anti" to "not opposed".

 

[SalesWeasel]

... our competition ...

Tell you what ... put 'em under the same rules that broadcast has to abide by & I'll gladly switch my position on their merger from "anti" to "not opposed".

Huh? So by that logic all CDs should be purchased at Wal-Mart (no cussin') and produced with a jingle between each song...same with the iPod. It's not XM or Sirius to blame for the "rules" -- it's Clear Channel, CBS, etc, who bend over backwards because some minister in Mississippi doesn't like Howard Stern.

Content is king...and most radio stations ain't got jack these days.

 

[middlega]

It's not XM or Sirius to blame for the "rules" -- it's Clear Channel, CBS, etc, who bend over backwards because some minister in Mississippi doesn't like Howard Stern.

Trust me, I'm neither a minister nor in Mississippi.

But if they are indeed "the competition" then they damned sure ought to play by the same rules. Otherwise, it's nothing more than a government mandated advantage as they're allowed to pander to a lower common denominator.

 

[SalesWeasel]

It's not XM or Sirius to blame for the "rules" -- it's Clear Channel, CBS, etc, who bend over backwards because some minister in Mississippi doesn't like Howard Stern.

Trust me, I'm neither a minister nor in Mississippi.

But if they are indeed "the competition" then they damned sure ought to play by the same rules. Otherwise, it's nothing more than a government mandated advantage as they're allowed to pander to a lower common denominator.

Not when you PAY for the service. And I hope your reference to lower common denominator isn't about "content" or Stern listeners. There are many more channels available, talk for the right and the left (funny, you have to PAY to get balanced opinion) and, of course; comedy (clean and uncensored), channels for the kids, classical music, trance (whatever the hell that is) and well, too many choices to list here.

And guess what, you can BLOCK channels you don't want your kids listening to. Yes...this horrible option of nearly on-demand content must be scrubbed clean by protectionist lobby groups lest the public discover how irrelevant our business really is.

 

[kjallen]

middlega,

With all due respect. This seems like the same kind of logic the NAB is using… a contradictory logic. If the satellite companies are “pandering to the lowest common denominator”, then they become irrelevant. If satellite radio is only listened to by the scum of the earth, or “lowest common denominator” as you say, then why would any advertiser want to waste their money with them? Why would any major car manufacturer even entertain the idea of installing the receivers if they only appealed to the bottom of society?

Would you REALLY want satellite radio to play by the same rules? Clean, safe, censored, over-regulated; just like our business. It seems to me that would threaten broadcast radio even more. An exact clone, only you get 200 channels of it and you can carry it across the country. At least now, if you chose, you can continue to use the argument that satellite radio appeals only to the morally destitute.

I know the game. Let’s pretend like this is all about the consumer and equality in the market place. If we can chain satellite radio to the fence, we can eventually snuff them out. I wish that someone against the merger would just tell the truth… “I hate satellite radio, it is yet another threat to conventional broken radio, I want it to go away”.

Instead, the tactic is to try to take it down with indirect hits. We all know what will happen if satellite radio is over-regulated like traditional radio. It will die… then the mission is accomplished, right?

The argument is that the government should not give the two companies a break or bailout by allowing the merger. I do not think you are bailing anyone out when you lift a restriction that should not have been put on them in the first place.

By the numbers, broadcast radio is still BETTER than satellite radio. We have a more robust infrastructure, we have more listeners, we generate more revenue. Let’s not screw it up. Every minute we whine and complain about what is going on at Sirius, XM, iTunes, or whoever; is a minute that we could improve our own product.

 

[middlega]

And I hope your reference to lower common denominator isn't about "content" or Stern listeners.

Hope all you like, but content is indeed precisely what I was referring to.

Do note, however, that I didn't say that was all the programming that existed on satellite.
Just that they've certainly worked hard at cultivating that aspect of it.

 

[middlega]

If the satellite companies are “pandering to the lowest common denominator”, then they become irrelevant. ... why would any advertiser want to waste their money with them?

Ever hear the phrase ""Nobody's ever gone broke underestimating the intelligence of the general public."

Would you REALLY want satellite radio to play by the same rules? Clean, safe, censored, over-regulated; just like our business.

It's that last bit where we disagree most thoroughly. Although it might be splitting hairs if I made the distinction that it isn't so much under regulated (as I started to say) as it is existing regulations are just horribly under enforced.

 

[SalesWeasel]

And I hope your reference to lower common denominator isn't about "content" or Stern listeners.

Hope all you like, but content is indeed precisely what I was referring to.

Do note, however, that I didn't say that was all the programming that existed on satellite.
Just that they've certainly worked hard at cultivating that aspect of it.

Well, since terrestrial radio can't give the public what they want, satellite radio fills the void. You can have your "family friendly" bland, suburban radio. I like my talk to have a little bite to it. You know, the way real people really speak. So again...If I have to PAY for it so be it.

 

[SalesWeasel]

If the satellite companies are “pandering to the lowest common denominator”, then they become irrelevant. ... why would any advertiser want to waste their money with them?

Ever hear the phrase ""Nobody's ever gone broke underestimating the intelligence of the general public."

Would you REALLY want satellite radio to play by the same rules? Clean, safe, censored, over-regulated; just like our business.

It's that last bit where we disagree most thoroughly. Although it might be splitting hairs if I made the distinction that it isn't so much under regulated (as I started to say) as it is existing regulations are just horribly under enforced.

I wish the FCC would come right out and say the words or phrases specifically. That way, the Supreme Court can overturn their arbitrary and unconstitutional regulation of said content. Win-win!

Families have too many choice these days making content regulation irrelevant. Aforementioned IPods, CDs, DVD players so suburban moms can numb their children with banality away from home...I just can't see how the government has any place dictating "values" to radio companies.

You get what you pay for.