The Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), a non-profit public policy group, is urging federal regulators to approve the Sirius-XM merger, and to proceed with the modernizing of antitrust rules for all industries.
CEI feels that the satellite radio industry is not its own thinly segmented market, but rather a small part of a great media market that includes commercial radio, cable television, the Internet and more.
"The approximately $13 billion in market capitalization of both companies pales in comparison to $57 billion value of one major cable company alone," CEI stated.
“Regulators also should refrain from using the merger review process to extract a parade of concessions from these struggling companies,” added CEI Vice President and Director of Technology Studies Wayne Crews.
The CEI is a non-profit, non-partisan public policy group, that has long encouraged policy makers to reform antitrust law and its enforcement in the interest of fostering increased competition and innovation.
You mean this group is not for sale? Boy, I bet that pissed Rehr off.
As I become more informed about this merger which I was dead against, I have to say that it looks like if would benefit us and it might be a nessesity. I still have my concerns though.
Yeah, creating a monopoly is always good for the consumer.
If Mel says it isn't a "necessity" and you don't believe him, why do you believe him when he claims it will be good for consumers?
prozac: I have to say that I completely agree with you. Remember that originally I was against the merger as well, because in general I view mergers as being "bad" for the consumer. I like competition, I like choice. But rarely do we see a merger opening up more choices for consumers. This is definitely a unique situation.
I still definitely have my concerns as well (I voiced them here). But CEI had an interesting point:
"Wall Street, investors, programmers, consumers, already-poised rivals, and new entrants collectively will discipline more thoroughly than could the Federal Communications Commission. That’s as it should be."
Think about it. Collectively, we as the consumer will organically keep Sirius-XM in check. If they do away with "the essence" of satellite radio, we will simply move on to any of the alternatives that can replace it.
And we actually have already done that with terrestrial radio. That industry currently enjoys a monopoly (the "localism" that they promote so much is actually it's own government sanctioned monopoly), but consumers have spoken by adopting iPods, satellite radio, internet radio, etc as a replacement. And we can do just the same with satellite radio.
"As I become more informed about this merger which I was dead against" - prozac
And by "more informed" do you mean reading the slanted repeated opinions posted at orbitcast?
"But rarely do we see a merger opening up more choices for consumers" - Ryan Saghir
PLEASE - Tell me exactly HOW we're going to have more choices on the existing maxed-out systems without removing channels or furthur compressing the sound quality? And these are choices I DO NOT WANT OR NEED.
HOW Ryan? New equipment? Fuck those greedy assholes.
ONE satellite radio company instead of TWO is LESS choice. LESS. Buy both if you want them both, don't ruin what we do have because a bunch of suits spent too much money and mis-managed their respective services and now want a bail-out.
Yes, if sat radio goes to s**t I can listen to MP3's IF HAVE TO - but I do not want to have to do this. There's nothing for 12.95 a month that is nationwide and includes so much. You're telling me I'm supposed to sit my cell phone on my desk at work (where I barely get reception) and stream crappy sounding audio? My battery wouldn't last half the day. What are my choices for morning shows? How much (total) will this cost me, certainly more than satellite. Yes, they are other "choices". Crappy ones, which we may be FORCED to use if the mergered XM/Sirius pisses us off.
Right now, they have eachother to keep themselves in check. Post-merger, they'll have MP3 players and terrestrial radio which while technically ARE options, they are POOR ones.
Has anyone else noticed the high level of vocabulary common in the anti-merger camp? "F* those greedy *holes" - that's a sure way to convince readers to take your posts seriously.
SteveWeBB: Because the majority of people who subscribe to satellite radio did so through a new car purchase. They didn't actively choose which car they would buy based on the provider that comes with it. And so if you happen to like MLB and NASCAR, you're screwed.
Will they remove channels to make room for the shared content? Yes, absolutely. Does that concern me? Yes, absolutely.
But that is no different than when either XM or Sirius sign on a new content partner. If Sirius signed on MLB, or XM signed on the NFL, I don't think we'd hear any opposition from anyone.
This streamlines it further - creating a standardized satellite radio format, along with combining the marketing, R&D, and operational expenses.
I hate to sound like a kiss-ass but I agree with SteveWeBB, if you want both pay for both.. there are a lot of people who only want to have sirius for the n.f.l. package that they have so let's merge so we can have that?? no.. if you want that get sirius from september through january.. don't flush the best satrad company for just that..
>>>If Mel says it isn't a "necessity" and you don't believe him, why do you believe him when he claims it will be good for consumers?
I believe the $5B to $7B saved in synergies would afford a great benefit to the consumer in the form of more R&D, cheaper subscription rates, hardware improvements and more diverse content. Don't you agree Frontmed?
I don't believe any of the supposed savings will be passed on to the consumers. I don't think we'll get more $ towards R&D, I think sub pricing will rise and content will suffer. Sorry, I'm with Steve. Having to give up the service if it becomes crap and moving back to an iPod isn't much choice at all.
And JB, aren't you a smarmy little fuck. I guess you're just a bigger person than everyone else.
Thank you for providing further evidence to my argument PFreak.