Skip to comments.Kerry Urges Martin Not to Rubber-Stamp Sirius-XM Merger
Posted on 04/08/2008 7:11:05 AM PDT by paltz
Senator John Kerry (D-MA) is urging FCC Chairman Kevin Martin not to follow the DOJ's lead and "rubber-stamp" the approval of the proposed Sirius-XM Satellite Radio merger. In a letter to Martin last week, Kerry said that, if approved, the merger must contain conditions to prohibit the partnership of "exercising monopolistic powers" that could result in "diminished service at increased rates."
"While the Department of Justice has found that 'the evidence does not demonstrate that the proposed merger of XM and Sirius is likely to substantially lessen competition,' serious concerns remain as to how this merger will impact consumers if it is permitted to go forward," Kerry wrote.
He also noted that the Commission's 1997 order establishing the Satellite Digital Audio Radio Service (DARS) prohibits a merger of the two satcasters. And to move forward,he wrote, would seem to "directly contradict the intent of the Commission in establishing this service." (04-03-08)
This is a bad deal. This merger should be approved, and NOW! It is nothing more than the Old MSM on death-watch, trying to stop the future. APPROVE THIS MERGER NOW!!!
I agree with Kerry on this one. The proverbial stopped clock.
Absolutely not. As a subscriber to XM, I want the content increase. If their prices go up, I’ll switch back to free radio medium.
You agree that the merger between SIRI and XM should not be approved? Why?
Not having satellite radio what happens after the merger? Will one receiver work with the others signal? Or is one person just s.o.l. (like having an AM radio in an old car).
I have subs for both XM and SIRI. It is the future of radio, and the NAB, who is spending tons of money to politicians, wants the deal dead. This is the old media death watch it its worse.
No, to receive the combined content, you would need to buy a new, interoperable receiver and pay for the additional content.
both receivers will continue to work. those ‘duplicate’ programming types that exist now between the to sat companies will be eliminated and one signal broadcast to both systems until new radios are built.
Gee, sounds so familiar...just can't place the name.
Said Kerry as Clear Channel and NAB money spills out of his pockets.
Short of coming into my house and stealing my iPods, terrestrial radio will never get me back. Never. Even shows nominally on terrestrial radio, I download for enjoyment “on demand.”
This is about terrestrial radio trying to put the genie back in the bottle. Clear Channel’s “more commericals, smaller playlists” formula has been revealed by Satrad as the disaster that it is and now they are running to the government for protection from their own poor decision.
Just another variation of private profits, public losses.
I subscribe to both XM and Sirius and will save money with the merger. Being able to get Howard, the NFL, MLB and NASCAR in one place is just a bonus...
No. If you have a radio now, it will continue to work exactly as it does. If you want the blended content, you have to get a new radio that will work with both.
I've had XM for a few years now and not entirely sure I'd care about the extra sirius content but when my current radio quits or gets stolen again(dummies) I'll get a dual receiver. Assume the merger goes through and I think it will...too much money greasing palms.
Competitive Enterprise Institute supports xm/sirius merger http://cei.org/gencon/003%2C05877.cfm
PTC Applauds Justice Department Approval of XM/Sirius Merger
ATR Praises Justice Department Approval of XM/Sirius Merger
Kerry you idiot go work on something worthwhile.
Like polishing your war medals or something.....
I sure hope you are right...we really like our xm, espcially when traveling from state to state.
Auntie, XM, and or SIRI will both go bankrupt if this deal is not approved. It is that simple. The NAB and main stream old radio media CCU etc., made very bad decisions and are now paying. SatRad is the future and the NAB knows. They have NO hand in SatRad, but they still have very deep pockets that extends to politicians. Check the NAB donor list. Consumers have NO idea how bad this deal has been for them and invesators. Our politicians at thier worse.
Amen. They should not let them merge, if htey don’t, those companies will probably go out of business. NASCAR and other sports would go back on the normal radio. Potty mouthed entertainers like Howard Stern would end up in oblivion. And who cares if there’s not a place to listen to some obscure song from from Foghat or some eyeliner wearing punk rocker from Seattle that no one’s ever heard of?
It appears XM was in service for a while before Sirius started up.
Nobody told the XM folks “You can’t launch service unless a competitor starts up also”.
How, then, does a merger create any worse situation than that which existed prior to the launch of Sirius?
See, it evens extends here...Hey, you old media guys should put out your resume. CCU is DEAD, and radio, in its current form, is DEAD! I want my SatRad programming all day, and in every location. No other technology other than Sats exists that will allow a clean uninterrupted signal.
I just let the answering machine pick up when he calls.
I wonder what his stance will be if Heinz decides to merge with Hunts and form a single ketchup monopoly...
It would affect more households than this merger, but can you imagine his rage if the Republicans stepped in and tried to stop it?
Raises his hand...
I would care, quite a bit, in fact.
Discovering new types of music and rediscovering forgotten hits are but two of the joys of satellite radio.
Satellite radio puts the joy back into radio. Pure and simple...
P.S. MRN and PRN have terrestrial affiliates in most major cities - satellite is not your only option to listen to the race.
...your arguments were heard when cable tv came along. huge outcry by media, but we know how that turned out. to stifle technology is crazy. the merger will happen in one form or another. one of the two companies will go bk, so ultimately you will have one company.
Well alot of us LOVE our satellite radios. My stations are rarely off the talk radio stations. No one is making you pay for it if you don’t want it. You’d rather they go bankrupt so none of us would have the choice apparently.
A combined XM/Sirius would not be a monopoly. Sure, they’ll probably carve off some duplicative programing, but that’s about it.
If they increased price, I would be more than happy to take that money and give it to Apple for a few extra iTunes downloads.
Terrestrial does not want the competition from Satrad. Period. Especially since their competing platform “HD Radio” is a complete and total non-starter.
In any event, DOJ has already signed off on the new pricing plan, so no worries on that.
That’s a pretty authoritarian statement on a pro-freedom web site.
Poor, old LURCH...desperately trying to maintain an appearance of relevancy. Nobody listens to this A$$HOLE, anyway...he should just go home and gobble up his “57 Varieties”.
Every one of you misses the bigger point here.
The reason Democrats such as Kerry don’t want the merger is because they want both companies to go out of business.
Why? Fairness Doctrine.
The Democrats will put the Fairness Doctrine back in once they have the WH and Congress.
Of course, this will put a crimp in conservative radio. Those hosts will need a place to do their shows...satellite radio.
Do you understand now?
The XM/Sirius merger would be monopolistic exactly how? Once XM and Sirius merge, would you no longer be able to listen to any other form of audio content?
The very fact that the NAB protested this merger so vigorously proves that they compete with satellite radio. Since they do, how can a combined XM/Sirius be monopolistic? The market is audio, not satellite radio.
If they are trying to stop the future, they ought to pay less attention to satellite radio. It's definitely not the future.
"Serious concerns" = loss of market share for the radio/communications corporations who donate to Kerry.
I wonder how much money Mr. Heinz is getting from the NABs...
It sounds like you’re suggesting that only one automobile manufacturer would be acceptable because horses are always available.
On the other hand, you are aware that a number of conservative talk shows and hosts will lose much if not all of their audience if XM and Sirius die, right?
Satellite Radio is also the only current broadcast-type audio that can be had 100% commercial free.
Until we get some sort of universal WiFi system up in cities, that is - then we can use internet radio stations.
Bad analogy. A horse isn’t a substitute for a car for a number of obvious reasons.
An iPod, on the other hand, is a substitue for a satrad.
Question - are you a satrad subscriber? If not, why do you care about this merger?
Correct. The ‘commercial-free’ statement is very important. It is at the root of this deal. Traditional radio has built a model on advertising that if undone will cause the industry to collapse, radio and advertising agencies. We heard these arguments from traditional media back when cable-tv was beginning. How many people do you know that does not have sat-tv or cable-tv. The NAB is attempting to kill Sat radio in the same manner.
My opinion is obviously at odds with yours, so you seek to discount my credibility? Do I now need to have a womb to comment on threads about right to life issues according to your litmus test?
That’s actually a ridiculous and glib analogy.
Nobody's holding a gun to a consumer's head and forcing him or her to get all of their audio entertainment from satellite radio. If XM and Sirius merge, terrestrial radio, iPods, etc. are going nowhere; all will compete for the consumer's ears. Where's the monopoly?
Even if this merger is allowed, there is still other competition in the “radio” field, most of which is actually free to the customer. Yes, that’s right, pay radio (satellite) is successfully competing with “free”. There’s regular radio, there’s HD radio, there’s satellite radio, and there’s internet radio. There are also now ‘radio’ services for cell phones. There’s also time-delayed ‘radio’ in the form of podcasts.
Your scenario doesn’t hold water. What you are suggesting is that GM shouldn’t have bought SAAB because that reduced the number of “Swedish designed automobiles” on the US market.
We also heard these same arguments from broadcast TV back when satellite TV was cranking up.
Not at all, in fact it’s quite appropriate. The comment it was in response to an implication that all audio content was essentially equivalent, which it is not. Satellite radio has a number of technical advantages over terrestrial radio, as do cars over horses. They aren’t equal, thus only one satellite radio content provider is a monopoly.
I detect that you are hostile toward satellite radio.
I can only guess as to why. You probably have a problem with Howard Stern or some other percieved leftist bent to it. I would suggest you not reduce the whole medium to that view. Look at the bigger picture.
Not to mention that satellite radio may be the only outlet for true conservative viewpoints being aired.
Almost by definition you can’t have a monopoly on a non-essential good.
Love it as much as I do, satrad is a luxury good.
If it went away, I would just switch to listening my iPod full time.
How is an iPod not a competitor to, or a substitute for, satrad?