Remember that resolution against the XM-Sirius merger that was passed in Alabama? Well it seems that several keen-eyed commenters have noticed that the chief sponsor of the resolution actually owns a terrestrial radio station as well as a production company.

Mike Hubbard, Alabama's House Minority Leader and the chief sponsor of a resolution against the Sirius-XM merger (HJR144) cites his own possible conflict of interest in his official bio:

"Hubbard’s company, Auburn Network, Inc., owns and operates WANI NewsTalk 1400, a commercial radio station in the Auburn/Opelika market as well as Studio 197, an audio production company serving the national broadcast industry..."

In his legislative bio, we also learn that Hubbard is a member of the Alabama Broadcasters Association which identifies itself as a trade association representing radio and televisions stations. The ABA itself has officially denounced the XM-Sirius merger, obviously using the strength of its 287 members (particularly one certain House Minority Leader) to push forward their agenda.

Conflict of interest? Nah, it's for the good of the people! 

[via The Port Chronicle]

Clear Channel Radio and mobile entertainment provider mSpot have entered in a content agreement, allowing for music programming from ten Clear Channel stations to be heard on mSpot's radio services.

Clear Channel Radio is providing mSpot with Contemporary Hits Radio (CHR) and Urban programming from five of its most popular terrestrial stations: WHTZ (New York), WWPR (New York), KHHT (Los Angeles), WGCI (Chicago) and WMIB (Miami).

Spanish-language content from four Latin channels and a playlist of Hip-Hop hits (from Clear Channel Radio's Format Lab) also are now all available to mSpot subscribers commercial free.

If that's not bad enough, next month mSpot expects to distribute live broadcasts from almost 100 Clear Channel Radio stations.

"Wireless carriers, entertainment and media companies are working hard to make new and compelling content available to a variety of mobile phones," said mSpot CEO and co-founder Daren Tsui. "Radio programming is among the most requested mobile content, so we're thrilled to be able to offer Clear Channel Radio's top-rated and original music channels to mSpot users."

mSpot announced yesterday that they've reached 1 million subscribers since going live with their first service in 2005.

[via FMQB] 

The former president of CBS' radio division, Dan Mason, will replace Joel Hollander as CBS Radio's president and chief executive on April 16th.

Mason left CBS Radio back in 2002 but has been a consultant and adviser for CBS Radio, as well as a variety of clients. Dan Mason worked closely with iBiquity as part of his consulting gig, and his focus will likely be to grow the HD Radio segment of CBS Radio.

"Part of this will be about the core business, making sure we're making the right decisions from a programming standpoint as well as a sales standpoint," Mason told the Wall Street Journal. "The second part is to nurture digital efforts."

Mason echoed a similar statement for the New York Times, "To grow our business, it is a combination of two things: executing for our listener and to explore all the new things that high-definition radio will bring."

So what's to become of Joel Hollander? His departure wasn't unexpected - though a bit sooner than expected - as he told the suits at CBS that he planned to leave when his contract expired at the end of the year.

Rumors abound that Hollander might be making the move to Sirius to sit alongside his mentor Mel Karmazin, but Inside Radio thinks those rumors have little merit. Time will only tell.

David Rehr, President/CEO of the fan-favorite NAB, did his best to position terrestrial radio as struggling local broadcasters fighting the good fight in his Congressional testimony. But yet in his recent letter to the FCC, Rehr talks about how a merged satellite radio threatens national radio.

February 28, 2007 - Written testimony (PDF) in front of the House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary Antitrust Task Force:

"...media industry observers have agreed that '[s]atellite radio is a national platform,' thereby clearly differing from locally-licensed and locally-oriented terrestrial broadcast stations."

March 22, 2007 - David Rehr's Letter (PDF) to FCC Chairman Kevin Martin:

"A satellite radio monopoly will also thwart program access by other media, especially regional and national radio networks."

So which is it? Local or National? Hopefully someone else is picking up on these inconsistencies.
Thanks Tim! 

NAB President/CEO David Rehr opened up his heart and wrote in a 4-page letter to the FCC Chairman that the "two satellite radio providers has served consumers well."

Sadly the love-fest ends there (just as I was getting warmed up to Mr. Rehr), as he goes on to state - once again - that the XM-Sirius merger "violates the antitrust laws and established FCC rules." Rehr also used his favorite line saying that approving the merger would create "a government-sanctioned monopoly," etc etc etc.

Sound repetitive? You betcha, David Rehr even uses the word "monopoly" a dozen times (not including the one time he used the word "monopolistic").

But I just want to ignore all that, throw away all these hateful feelings and focus in on these kind words:

"Each [satellite radio] provider has differentiated itself with unique programming and equipment offerings."

Aw shucks Dave, that's so sweet!

[FMQB and Radio Online] 

In response to the NAB's latest anti-XM/Sirius merger ad, a Sirius Satellite Radio spokesperson called it "deliberately misleading and hypocritical" and that one of the two quotations in the ad was "taken totally out of context."

"The NAB ad is deliberately misleading and hypocritical coming from people who say one thing to the Congress when they oppose our merger and the opposite in radio consolidation proceedings before the FCC and in SEC filings by their member companies," Sirius said in response to a query made by Radio & Records.

In question is the second quote in the ad, which supposedly came from Advertising Age. Sirius says the quote was taken out of context, and to prove it, they've provided a transcript of the Q&A:

Ad Age: There are questions about whether this market can sustain two players. What happens there?

Mel Karmazin: I certainly wouldn't rule out anything that is in the American public's best interest. You are dealing with two companies -- it would be great if there was a monopoly, but the second best thing is a duopoly. If the market is as big as we think it is, you're going to get two very profitable companies. There is nothing inherent that would preclude the companies from having interoperable radio or shared content. It's not the current business plan, but nothing would stop that.  

Two questions later in the “Advertising Age” interview, Karmazin is asked if he is opposed to the notion of a merger with XM:  

Ad Age: You're not opposed to it?

Mel Karmazin: The business model we are following is that we are an independent company. We don't need to combine with anybody.

[Radio & Records] 

Inside Radio is spinning reporting that XM Satellite Radio's COO Nate Davis mentioned at a recent conference that the pricing of a combined XM+Sirius service might possibly run at $18-$20 a month.

Inside Radio called this "the real cost of satellite" in a recent email subject line. And here's a direct quote showing how they're trying their best to try to smear satellite radio:

"The same day Mel Karmazin was wriggling around the pricing question at the House Anti-Trust Task Force two weeks ago — XM COO Nate Davis was giving the Bear Stearns conference a better fix. He was ballparking the “best of both worlds” XM+Sirius lineup at perhaps $18 to $20 a month, and that may be more than some folks on Capitol Hill expect."

If you'll recall, Mel Karmazin told a House telecom subcommittee - when asked if a combined service price discount would be either $10 or $2 - that it "looks closer to ten than to two."

So let's do some math. Dual-service subscribers currently pay $26/month, so a combined price of $18-$20 is in fact $6-$8 less expensive. Now, is that actually closer to $10 off than it is to $2 off? (gasp!) Why yes it is!

Now let's see, is this approach of using XM/Sirius Execs words against each other in anyway similar to the NAB's recent ad campaign? No it can't be - a legitimate publication like Inside Radio would never do something like that!

[Inside Radio] 

The Washington Examiner has a very interesting piece on the NAB is so gung-ho against the XM-Sirius merger. While NAB is crying that the merger would create an unfair competitor, the numbers just don't add up:

• Sirius and XM have a combined annual revenue of $1.49 billion.
  
• Clear Channel, the largest member of the NAB, raked in a whopping $1.97 billion in revenue... last quarter.
• Sirius and XM have nearly 14 million subscribers combined.
• Clear Channel boasts 110 million listeners.

So a single member of the NAB (an organization with a $20 million building in downtown DC and an $7 million annual lobbying budget) earns more money than the entire satellite radio industry combined, and nearly 10x as many listeners.

And yet, the NAB is saying that a merger would harm the "local" broadcast industry. (The term "local" is used to make them out to be "the little guy" - but we all know that terrestrial radio is far from "local" - *cough* voicetracking *cough*).

While the NAB is calling the merger a “a government bail-out to avoid competing in the marketplace,” The Examiner thinks it might be more accurate to say that the NAB is asking for government protection against competition.

[Washington Examiner via The Liberty Papers] 

In the recent arguments against the XM-Sirius merger, the NAB continuously is trying to smear the satellite radio industry as being "unlawful" companies.

Afterall, they can't go ahead and say that satellite radio isn't competing with terrestrial (see why here). So they instead need to frame satellite radio as being an irresponsible industry not capable of handling the responsibility of being a 'monopoly' (something that terrestrial radio is well versed in).

Take for example their recent ad campaign, where the NAB highlights troubles with satellite radio repeater towers, and receivers with over-emitting FM modulators. These are items that are either already resolved or that XM/Sirius are working with the FCC to resolve.

Yet, as Mel Karmazin poignantly highlighted at yesterday's hearing, four major terrestrial radio companies are settling payola charges with the FCC. What did the pot say to the kettle again?

David Rehr, the NAB's cabin boy Chairman, stated in his testimony to House Judiciary subcommittee that XM and Sirius haven't complied with an "FCC rule to develop a device that works with both services" -- but yet, they have. The 1997 FCC license simply states that XM/Sirius must develop an interoperable receiver - not bring it to market. Mel Karmazin yesterday explained that while a radio capable of receiving both XM and Sirius exists, it doesn't make financial sense to subsidize a radio that can receive another company's signal.

But is all this whining working?

At the recent Bear Stearns Media Conference, where FCC Chairman Kevin Martin Keynoted, it was stated that the FCC would be serious about enforcing rules, but that past infractions do not necessarily have "character implications."

A recent note from Robert Peck at Bear Stearns, highlighted that Chairman Martin stated that the key issue would in fact be defining the market and that concessions would depend on the harms identified.

And when it comes to "defining" the market, well then, terrestrial radio has already done that for us. 

The Bear Stearns Media Conference 2007 kicked off in Palm Beach, and terrestrial radio bigwigs Les Moonves (CEO, CBS Radio) and Bob Neil (President/CEO, Cox Radio) presented today.

Les Moonves essentially steered clear of the satellite radio subject, simply stating, "We're local and [satellite radio is] not." (Les should win an award for that statement, because it's truly perceptive.)

Bob Neil on the otherhand took the subject head on, comparing the XM-Sirius merger to the game of Monopoly (get it?) and equating the merger to the owning of Park Place and Boardwalk with hotels on them.

"It's just too tempting when you have the monopoly," Neil said. "It's just never in the interests of consumers to have a monopoly in one space."

Hello, Pot... meet Tea Kettle. Guess what color you are?