On the 11th hour, NAB meets with the FCC

>>>>>>> They argue that if Sirius and XM were allowed to merge, it would give them complete control of that piece of the spectrum (which historically the FCC has shied away from). This isn't much of a breakout from the NAB's prior arguments, but they are thin-slicing the subject.

This is, to me, the strongest argument against the merger -- NAB is late in making it since [at least] two other organizations have made the same argument previously.

But even if you take issue with the arguments of myself and many others, that a monopoly shouldn't be permitted by DOJ, what justification can there be for retroactively changing the rules under which the spectrum was licensed, i.e., requiring it to be held by two different organizations?

Why should a single organization be allowed to control ALL of the spectrum licensed for satellite radio services? Is this not a fundamental complaint about terrestrial, that CCU owns too much of it? It seems the same people who are bitching about CCU owning too big a piece of the terrestrial pie are the same people who are wholeheartedly supporting the sdars merger.

How does that make any sense?

This is the direction that NAB should have taken early on, rather than the public, idiotically-run campaign that took them nowhere.

Good for the NAB. Mel, keep your dirty hands off of my XM.

Easy fix. Give up the other license and the spectrum use one of the two companies use. They won't be without a second provider for long, imo.

the people who claim to have an XM sub or Sirius sub and are against the merger are either morons, liars, or are simpletons and do not understand what is at stake

YAAAAAAAA ONE PERSON ON HERE WHO KNOWS WHAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT!!!! THANKS SUNNY1 !!!!

The NAB obviously has not been able to stop the merger, so now they are trying to shoot the merger in the foot by trying to get the FCC to limit the merged entity's bandwidth. If the FCC agree to this, the merger would be nothing more than a joke.

The longer this takes, the less XM & Sirius can afford to pursue this merger (maybe that's the NAB's intent?). It's going to get to the point they're going to have to go on their merry way.....there's too many potential customers holding out on becoming subscirbers to either service, because of the indecision. This has to be killing both services in terms of holiday sales.

The reason I am against the merger is quality of programming, which on XM's Squizz for example has degraded and become repetitive hits based which is not what XM was meant to be. XM used to play the stuff you don't here on FM and for the most part as totally abandoned that approach to programming. I turn on Squizz and I hear the same exact song I heard yesterday, that is SIRIUS FM like programming in my book. XM has good talk and sports, but other than that I bough tam Mp3 player for my music needs. I don't know if a failure of the merger will change programming at all, but XM is sounding more like FM the thing it was supposed to beyond, well it's not. It is like AM like FM it's XM!

Probably what the NAB is aiming at is if that if one of the company's has to divulge of their bandwith, a group of NAB terrestrial giants can go in and snatch it up for pennies on the dollar, knowing the merged company has to get rid of it. And then turn around and offer satellite radio service of their own. Then, there wouldn't be any question about competition. LOL

If the merge doesn't happen, it's very possible we could kiss Sirius AND XM goodbye.

Personally, I hope the merger does happen becuase it'll be better for the companies as whole. But I have every intention of keeping my Sirius exactly how it is.. there's nothing on XM I want or need.

I'm a shareholder for the merger...because Serius and XM aren't a monopoly...Monopolies need to be stopped when they make excessive profits and gouge consumers..hardly the case for XM and Serius....the two companies offer a voluntary service...you don't have to subscribe!!!!
If I am trying to establish a business and a fellow competitor is starting the same business to make it and we both are losing money, we should be able to join together if our chances for profitability together are better.. that's what free markets are all about!!

all you paranoid radio listeners afraid of this combination ARE REALLY JUST INSECURE
because your own businesses are becoming a DINOSAUR!! PROVIDING a lousy product with too many commercials..ineffective and decling advertis ing and declining numbers of listeners.. Content that caters to the lowest common denominator! Meanwhile the iphone doesn't have to come under the fcc rules... they have bypassed the rules of regulation..consumers want more choices!Serious and XM aren't the enemy to the radio industry...Apple, Microsoft, and the phone companies will be..

"If the merger doesnt happen, its very possible we could kiss Sirius XM goodbye"
.............Some of us already have!..........everything they got can be found online and it wont be long before the new FM(XMsiri) will be asking the NAB to help get all those subs back

They may not be a monopoly in the traditional sense, but I don't think they should get to keep all the spectrum, and I wonder if the FCC were to come to back and tell them that, would they continue with the merger, or what? I think the two compete with each other well, and just think everything's fine the way it is.

the spectrum, if told to relinquish by the FCC, would not be sold by XM/Sirius to another party, it would be given back to FCC (with constraints of financial consideration given) and re-auctioned or allocated to another bidder or industry entrant.

It's also been said (although I concede, I don't know if it was by Mel/Gary or just some dork on a forum somewhere) that if the stipulation were that they had to give up spectrum from either side, that one would pull out.

I certainly hope this happens so I can be excited about XM again.

It's also been said (although I concede, I don't know if it was by Mel/Gary or just some dork on a forum somewhere) that if the stipulation were that they had to give up spectrum from either side, that one would pull out.

I certainly hope this happens so I can be excited about XM again.

Sure as long as radio is willing to give up 50% of the terr radio specturm to Sirius/XM.

so FM anything from 88-100 is now back up for bid.

FM can have 100.1-108

have fun

hey ryan...that pic of Rehr needs more cameltoe.

I wonder how much Rehr left in the envelope under the memo...

I'll bet he cried at one point...

"Why should a single organization be allowed to control ALL of the spectrum licensed for satellite radio services?"

STOP RIGHT THERE. by breaking out the sat radio spectrum, you already fail since its not the ONLY spectrum to provide these services.....

there is AM/FM/HDradio/Cell/Wireless Internet/Sat TV.

just because XM/SIRI have a model that allows for national access does not make it a monopoly.

Any one of these "other" spectrum's can provide the same service, of course at cost.

so you say "cost", well starting up XM/SIRI was billions huh? well spend the same money on any one of the other spectrum's and you too can have national access to provide the same services.

the ability to do this exsist outside of the XM/SIRI allotment of spectrum, its just these companies don't want to spend billions to compete, just prevent profitable competition in the form of xm+siri. now they might not be any more profitable together but it sure seems like they would have a better chances at it...AND THIS IS THE REAL REASON WHY NO ONE WANTS THEM TO MERGE.

Well, it is my opinion that it is definitely time for some congressional intervention into the piss poor performance of the FCC. They issued a time circulation document that shows what they are claiming they have been doing for the entire year, yet the SIRI/XM Docket 07-57 does not even show up on the list. Are you telling me that they have done absolutely nothing in 260+ days? Thats 180 timeclock days and another 80 they wasted before even starting the clock. I really think Congress needs to step in here and demand to know what they are actually doing each day and why this merger is being dragged along like this. Anyone know any particular senators or reps we can call who will actually respond?

Support the kind of journalism done by the NewsHour... Become a member of your local PBS station.

To emphasize one point- white- collar workers aren't on the timeclock system. This means that they can be made to work a 60- hour week under certain circumstances (like, say, a lingering recessionary job market). Their nominal schedule could still be 9- 5, but br/ they could work 8- 6, with occasional nights and weekends. That's just got to distort the productivity figures. Now, some of that is slack time, but that applies to blue- collar workers as well. /