Representative Paul Broun (R-GA) sent a letter on Friday to US Attorney General Michael Mukasey, FTC chairman Deborah Platt Majoras and FCC chairman Kevin Martin, blasting the merger between XM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc and Sirius Satellite Radio Inc.
Broun is a member of the House Homeland Security Committee and the House Science & Technology Committee.
He wrote that the merger would result in an "elimination of competition" that "would hurt my constituents who are consumers of satellite radio."
Broun said the original FCC decision to issue licenses to two satellite radio providers "resulted in robust competition and expanded choice for the American consumer, all of which would be undermined by a merger of Sirius and XM."
He added that "a united Sirius/XM would be free to raise consumer prices, unchecked in the marketplace."
Broun also pointed out that the FCC "has never before allowed the only two competitors in a given market to combine. Present circumstances do not warrant the FCC's complete reversal of its conclusions in the satellite radio licensing decision, or the consumer benefits and protections that have resulted from that decision."
[Billboard via Orbitcast Forums]
Thanks N2DEEP!
Translation: I have too much money tied up in terrestrial radio and I can not afford to loose any more money so I must try to stop the merger.
Gee it's nice that this guy is a member of the House Homeland Security Committee and the House Science & Technology Committee.- I am glad that he is so on the ball and submitting his comments past the zero hour- I hate to think of how "delayed" he would answer a security issue. And I would like to know what's does the House Science and Technology Committee do and how much is this costing the taxpayers??
He wrote that the merger would result in an "elimination of competition" that "would hurt my constituents who are consumers of satellite radio."
In other words what he is really saying is:
I know nothing about Sirius or XM and what programming they offer- but I am being paid by my constituents so I have to vote against it.
Hey, it's Christmas and I'm bored. Oh, I know. I can right a stupid letter to the FCC. I know I've had months and months to let them know my opinion, but I'm going to do it now because I just got this nice $10,000 Best Buy gift card from the NAB.
>>> He wrote that the merger would result in an "elimination of competition" that "would hurt my constituents who are consumers of satellite radio."
The argument that the merger does NOT materially impede competition is just ridiculous.
Even if you DO buy the "larger market" scenario (created by Mel & Parsons just for the purpose of getting the merger approved) it is insane to think that eliminating one of the two players in satellite radio does not adversely affect the competitive environment.
Has anybody paused to think that if they do not merge, the only way they will survive is to RAISE their prices???
"Has anybody paused to think that if they do not merge, the only way they will survive is to RAISE their prices???"
Let'em raise the price by a buck or two. The commercial entertainment value I receive, is worth it in my book. I want choice in my satellite radio provider.
This from a doctor who was fined for practicing without a license? Maybe he should mind his own business. But with $19,000 coming from PACs for his most recent election, I guess he has several businesses to mind...
House Science and Technology Committee........Now thats funny! I believe it has been proven time and again(during the RIAA fiasco most recently) that our little congress has nary a clue about technology......these people are the truest definition of "mindless trogs" i have ever encountered.
Uncheck on price? The check and blance is the free radion. People only willing to pay so much for a service that they can get it for free with a few comercials.
If they do not merger, raise the price is not out of the question. When do they realize that merger will boost the competition witht he traditional radio and force them to improve. Traditional radio have no content now what so ever. It is only good for everyone for this thign to merge. What is so hard to understand? Satellite is only have 20mil customers... that # is not significant to be a monoplogy.
This board is pathetic. Every time a Congressman comes out against the merger he's either stupid or on the take. Meanwhile, about 20 Congressmen have expressed their support for the merger, and they're all geniuses. Jesus - almost all of the Congressmen in favor of the merger are from NY, just like Mel who gives tons of dough to Democrats from NY. Their support is much more transparent than the one's who think the merger is a bad idea, at least the latter might have some justification in terms of wanting to protect their voters from needing to deal with one satrad company instead of two.
Well. You are right on this sense. The NAB, SIRI and XM are pouring money to these guys, still that doesn't downplay the fact that SIRI/ XM need to merge. It is only better for everyone.
Jose, you're an idiot and probably an asshole. If you don't want to "deal with one satrad company instead of two", DON'T!
I guess congress should have prevented the consolidated of the NFL 40 years ago so people wouldn't have to deal with one professional football league instead of two.
It's entertainment, not air travel, oil, or vital communication. If you don't want it, don't get it and leave the rest of us alone.
Jose, you're an idiot and probably an asshole. If you don't want to "deal with one satrad company instead of two", DON'T!
I guess congress should have prevented the consolidated NFL 40 years ago so people wouldn't have to deal with one professional football league instead of two.
It's entertainment, not air travel, oil, or vital communication. If you don't want it, don't get it and leave the rest of us alone.
Snead - doesn't sound like Jose is an idiot to me, and Ive been working on antitrust issues for about 20 years. first, your comparison to the NFL makes no sense, and actually proves the opposite of your point since Congress created a special antitrust exemption for NFL so it could deal with its players and vendors as one unit instead of multiple team units. Your other point, that sat rad is just entertainment, is wrong too. There is nothing in antitrust law that says that just because something is a luxury good, the two biggest (or in this case, only) companies in that industry should be allowed to merge. The two biggest jewelry companies wouldn't be allowed to merge, nor should they be. Take a break from calling people names and think about it. Is competition usually good for an industry and consumers or not? If there had been only one company that made camcorders, or cameras, or fax machines, or PCs, or any other technology, would these products have come down in price so much so quickly while also improving in quality? Probably not.
The thing I don't get is why do all of the people voting against this make it sound as if once they merge that's it... it's done... no other players can try sat radio???
Do they really think that if they merge no one will buy the isat from apple or whatever Microsoft or google or any other of a handful of companies bring to the table?
I could understand the monopoly concern if it was a product no one else was going to attempt but sat radio will be like cable tv... lots of players... and like cable tv you need one company offering all services... you don't want comcast for sports and time warner for local tv... you want them all under one roof... that's what's good for the consumer... one bill....
let em merge already....
Sat radio isn't an industry, independent of radio, mp3s, CDs, etc. It's a form of delivery. As Thomas says above, anyone is welcome to enter this particular form of delivery. A major corporation with established name recognition could easily step in and compete with S/XM. Why do anti-merger forces continue to ignore the fact that SatRadio innovators were forced to split off when they developed this technology in the first place? Would Congress care if two major jewellers combiend? Nope. Because it has nothing to do with censorship and it doesn't put more money in their pockets. That's why major corps. have been allowed to merge time and again while Sirius and XM have had to fight tooth and nail for this.
The main point this congressman is missing is that satellite radio is not a necessity of life, it's a luxury item. Even with a merged company no one is being forced to subscribe to satellite radio, they have plenty of alternatives available to them. If a satrad subscriber feels they are being charged too much or that program selection is inadequate all they have to do is cancel their subscription. The marketplace will rule. Apparently this concept goes over the heads of some of our legislators.
Does this congressman even talk to people who are stock holders and/or subscribers.
Many of the subscribers are stock holders. Stock holders of both Sirius and XM approved the merger by a very large margin. Does this bozo even have satelite radio. He is afraid of a monopoly, what about the legal monopoly call the US Posatal service. Maybe they should apply the law equally. Bet you find some of his big contributors are the local commerical radios and their stock holders.
Does he also realize that if not approved one of companies will go under and he will be stuck with what ever is left.
Also no one has to purchase satelite Radio, so let the people who use it and purchase it decide. Oh that's right they already have, but yo yo's like this think they are better then the people paying his salary. Frankly I do not want morons like this speaking for me.
He is a typical politican, clueless, unless someone has $$$$ for his re-election war fund.