"This also kicks off the informal "shot clock" for the FCC, which likes to make a decision like this within an 180-day timeline. This brings the earliest the FCC would make a decision to sometime in December."

Ryan exactly where did you get the idea that the FCC must wait the full 180 days to make a decision?

Sorry, you're right, I meant to say "latest" not "earliest" -- I've updated the post to reflect this.

Will PAC be filing its formal complaint now?

what is the DOJ doing during this time ?

what is their time line for decision ?

before or after FCC ?

I don't really understand where to write my comments? The third box on that page? I'm generally not an idiot. Just today, apparently.

Thanks for the link Ryan, I have sent my opposition to the merger. I hope the merger is denyied not cause of what the NAB has spewed but on a seperate issue. I would also home the NAB gets Slapped for their opposition to change.

Bronowyn, here are some instructions to help fill out the fcc comments form.
www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/
i found these instructions using Orbitcasts niffty new "sphere it" feature at the bottom of the post. it really works great! just click on the first headline on the top left called "bloggers talking" its like the second post...

I hope that citizens realize that a single satellite provider could hurt traditional radio's programming. Don't forget that satellite has the luxury of charging listeners subscription fees. Tiered pricing sounds good on its face but the reality this type of system is used to confuse customers making room for fee increases. (I work with NAB, as an FYI)

I filed my comment in opposition for the merger. Just because you can hear NFL on XM or MLB on Sirius does not mean that the distinct sound will stay that way. Once both platforms are merged, a new sound will be made which may not be pleasing to the old base or new subs.

I also don't fully buy into this whole SatRad is competing with other audio.

I do think that satrad is competing with other audio, as well as everything that is out there that is entertainment... That is not a reason to merge in my opinion, and I would as well rather see two (or more) satellite radio companies.. chances are the two companies have hired the lobbying firm that will give them their best shot at getting the merger through.. They say Mel gets what he wants and more than likely will this time.. But I'm hoping this will be one of those times he doesn't...

I find posts that say satradiio is not competing with free radiio very surprising. When driving in my truck, I turn on the radio and listen to one of the following: AM, FM, CD's or Satellite. I listen to all four of them.

When my truck is moving, the radio is ALWAYS on. It is called audio entertainment. When I get out of my truck, the entertainment stops. The important thing, is that I have multiple choices of entertainment to listen to, based on my mood. Of course satrad competes with free radio.

I enjoy having all of the choices at my fingertips. If two companies that have yet to post a profit can increase their probability of surviving and continuing to give me yet another choice, then by all means facilitate the merger.

Lets not make this more complicated OR political than it should be.

Please if people think that satellite radio and free radio do not compete than cable and satellite tv do not compete. By the governments logic cable does compete with satellite.

I hope that citizens realize that a single satellite provider could hurt traditional radio's programming.

If traditional radio's programming wasn't so awful, I would not have to sub to sat rad. Instead of spending time and resources on driving competitors out of business, maybe the NAB should focus more on attracting listeners, instead of alienating them. Does the NAB honestly think that if they drive both SATRAD companies out of business, I'm going to come back? Ain't gonna happen. If you want to play on a level field, then step up. Improve your product.

Don't forget that satellite has the luxury of charging listeners subscription fees.

Wow, SATRAD sure has it easy, don't they? Though it's nowhere near as luxurious having hardware as ubiquitous as an FM radio.

The thousands of stations represented by the NAB are stepping in to protect me from the two big bad SATRAD companies, though I do not recall an outcry from the "citizens" for it's protection.

MeatFarley, Your personal opinions about AM/FM are yours. Millions of people enjoy and benefit from local radio stations across the country. Our members have contributed over $10 billion in community service in 2005 alone.

You really think NAB is trying to put satellite radio out of business? Absurd. Did you know the papers submitted to Wall Street have stated that neither XM or Sirius is failing? Moreover, both have stated repeatedly that they will survive and even succeed if the merger is rejected.

No one really LIKES terrestrial radio. People TOLERATE terrestrial radio... because its free and to a lesser extent, because they give away free shit. Not because people enjoy 20 minute commercial breaks per hour or the same 10 songs for 6 weeks.

Don't kid yourself, shill.

MeatFarley, Your personal opinions about AM/FM are yours.

Yes, it is MY opinion. It's also the same opinion of the almost 13 million satellite subscribers, as well as the additional millions of people who own iPods. We formed this opinion all on our own, unlike your opinion, which is set by your employer. Fortunately, ours is the opinion that matters.

Millions of people enjoy and benefit from local radio stations across the country.

There is nothing "local" about radio anymore except traffic and weather, and guess what, I can get that from my XM as well. Explain to me how nationally syndicated radio shows, rebroadcast throughout the country are "local". Adam Carolla isn't "local". Rick Dees is not "local" Neither is Rush Limbaugh. My "local" radio stations have replaced their "local" DJs with pre-recorded shows and enormous blocks of advertisements. The only thing "local" is the radio tower. What it actually transmits is far from "local".

You really think NAB is trying to put satellite radio out of business?

Yes.

Absurd.

I think so too. But alas, your employer's actions have not convinced me otherwise.

Did you know the papers submitted to Wall Street have stated that neither XM or Sirius is failing? Moreover, both have stated repeatedly that they will survive and even succeed if the merger is rejected.

So why block it? What does the NAB have to gain by interfering with this merger?

You hit a major point right on the head Farley -

If the NAB isn't trying to put satellite radio out of business, then why oppose the merger? If the merger results in higher prices and less choice for satellite radio subscribers, shouldn't that actually benefit terrestrial radio? If they actually believe what they paid "independent" people to say, then the NAB should strongly support the merger as it would encourage satrad subscribers to cancel and go back to free radio. Is there something I missed from the "one-way competition" theory that refutes that logic? Or is the NAB just afraid that the merged company will offer a better product to recruit more subscribers away from terrestrial radio?