Senator Byron Dorgan (D-ND) called the Justice Department's decision to approve the merger of XM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc. and Sirius Satellite Radio Inc. "another disappointing example of this administration's blatant disregard for the public interest with regard to media ownership."
Dorgan, who seems to think that terrestrial radio "sprouted up" in 1997, cited the decade-old SDARS license as the main reason for being upset.
"There seems to be no limit to the mergers this administration will approve," said Dorgan. "These two companies were issued licenses a decade ago to provide competing national satellite radio service. Their license approval included a clause that prohibits them from merging into one company. Now the Justice Department has decided the contract they signed can't stand in the way of consolidation. That doesn't make any sense to me."
Dorgan said "the American consumer will pay the price."
Scoreboard:
Sirius/XM 1
Old farts with financial interests that
nobody cares about that are more likely to
find sex in bathroom stalls than listen to
satellite radio 0
What doesn't make sense is that guy in the office. What a clown.
the American consumer will pay the price."
NO THEY WON'T
they can just cancel
duh
Didn't know a merger would turn into partisan politics.
Well, I'm supporting the Democrats/Socialists/Liberals/Commies/etc you call them. I'm still not pro this merger and hope the FCC just throws so many stipulations that the merger wouldn't make sense.
This is actually the argument I agree with. Double standards. It's okay for the two satellite radio companies to disregard the laws that they agreed to, but a single mother can get sued for hundreds of thousands of dollars for sharing music? Am I the only one who thinks that there's something wrong with that?
Really? You dumb cunt.. Get over yourself. Maybe you'll get a nice gig lobbying for the NAB
Isn't he one of the Douchebags that excepted $$$ from the NAB, that and the Fact that he is a Democrat, to me means, I give more credibily to Crackhead Bob.
Not sure how anyone would believe a combined Sirius/Xm would be a true monopoly.especially when there are so many different sources of entertainment out there.
I agree with Dorgan too. Would a company be allowed to ignore environmental legislation simply because they unilaterally decided that they should be able to? Is OSHA voluntary? What about child labor and minimum wage laws? Oh, the marketplace has changed, so we don't think we have to comply with the ADA anymore. Get with the times man.
For better or worse, the gov't in its infinite wisdom decided that there should be room in the EM spectrum for two competing satrad companies. That should still be true now. XM/Siri should have to forfeit half of its combined bandwidth as a condition of the merger, and a new license should be auctioned.
Dorgan -ONE
Sat radio fanboy's - ZERO
monopoly's are bad for the consumer.
"These two companies were issued licenses a decade ago to provide competing national satellite radio service. Their license approval included a clause that prohibits them from merging into one company. Now the Justice Department has decided the contract they signed can't stand in the way of consolidation. That doesn't make any sense to me."
Dorgan said "the American consumer will pay the price."
Grow up fanboy's, sat. radio (if this merger goes thru) will be less value than it is now. The current admin. has screwed everything else up why not sat radio too.
Grow up fanboy's
Question: How did this old retarded bastard get into office?
This moron holds public office, it a shame for his constituents that voted for him. You had 2 companies with no profitability and a cash flow problem, they had no other choice, and it is better for us as consumers.
Lets not forget that monopolies have a disproportionate amount of market share and make large profits. XM nor Siri have either of these under their belt.
Interesting how some think once a stipulation in a contract is made, it can never change, regardless of changes in the market place. That is definately a political stance....however our US Constitution has been changed throughout its life...But NOOOOOOOO we dont want to change anything for little radio company that has combined market share of 5%.
Those against the merger never seem to say anything about the a-la-cart that is forthcoming. Is that not in the publics interest?
Maybe Dorgan just needs to realize that he is not the sharpest tool in the shed, and come to the reality that tens of thousands of people disagree with him. Could HE be wrong? No way, he is a politician who has taken money from the NAB.....
Interesting how some think once a stipulation in a contract is made, it can never change, regardless of changes in the market place. That is definately a political stance....however our US Constitution has been changed throughout its life...But NOOOOOOOO we dont want to change anything for little radio company that has combined market share of 5%.
I seem to remember there being amendments to the Constitution. I think you were still breaking the law if you did something before the document was amended.
I don't remember the stipulation being repealed. If they are allowed to merge that should have already been amended and the public should be aware of any consequences thereof. I think that it should have been dealt with before even announcing the merger.
And for those with all of the doom and gloom arguments that both companies would have gone under without the merger... When they announced the merger, both companies said that they would become profitable without the merger. You can't have it both ways.
> Those against the merger never seem to say anything about the a-la-cart that is forthcoming. Is that not in the publics interest?
Not if I have to spend hundreds of dollars replacing my equipment to utilize it.
It's ok, you pro-merger morons will have your amazing non-existent wifi technology and MP3 players to use after you "just cancel" because the service goes to crap. That's EXACTLY the same as live music/talk/news from the sky........
Less choice is better!!
Senator Dorgan is as clueless on the SAT Radio merger as Hilary Clinton is on healthcare. The consumer is the absolute CLEAR winner here. They benefit because if a current subscriber, a consumer now can have all the content of both Sirrius & Xm on 1 radio. The way it stands pre-merger, a consumer has to purchase 2 radios and have to subscriptions to get all the content for each service. The question will be now that the merger has been approved, how does SAT radio stay in business profitably? Let's see if the merger of cost structures that each company was looking for really lends to 1 profitable company. Terrestrial radio is awful & I can't listen to it. Every so-called "morning show" on terrestrial radio makes Ron & Fez look good & they suck! Sen. Dorgan must own stock in Clear Channel or something or be so out of touch that the mere mention of two companies "merging" causes him to think the next anti-trust law needs to be enacted to prevent a monopoly!
Oh yeah, a-la carte service, I forgot... when will my cable company start offering a-la carte channels? I only want 1 HBO channel, I don't need 10 as well as all the other superfluous channels they make you take & pay for. The cable companies are the TRUE monopoly. Why won't anyone go after them? The only other choice I have is SAT TV and everyone knows they are worse than the digital cable service (again, the true monopoly in every city). Once again, the Democrats blame Bush for everything. Why don't the Dems do something useful and go after the cable companies? They are the TRUE monopoly, not SAT radio!!!!!!
Posted by: Chipper | March 25, 2008 11:12 AM
I don't remember the stipulation [the clause prohibiting the two companies from merging] being repealed. If they are allowed to merge that should have already been amended and the public should be aware of any consequences thereof. I think that it should have been dealt with before even announcing the merger.
Chipper, what do you think has been happening over the last 400 days!
Good to see a politician from my home state getting some satellite radio publicity...whether it is good or bad.
just another douche that has accepted money from the NAB, anyone who is against the merger is not very bright. ok, the FCC did make a clause when the original licenses were given that they could not merge. so what? licenses can be changed. the argument that they would be a monopoly is true to the satellite radio market which makes up about 5% of the radio market. this is a monopoly that could not possibly hurt the consumer, if they merged and charged $100 a month guess what? everyone would cancel and go back to regular radio, and they would go out of business. satellite radio is not a necessity and who cares if only one company controls the market. mel karmizan is stating that there will be no price increases in the foreseeable future. and i love how the NAB wants up to 50% of the merged company for free to distribute whatever they want. what have they invested?
the truth is that these one will probably die if the do not merge so it will be a monopoly anyway. anyone who disregards the merger is either uneducated in the matter or has received $$$ from the NAB or other terrestrial radio lobbyists.
is the NAB afraid that terrestrial radio is dying like old school tv before cable? tell me how having over 100 channels that NEVER go out and are never have static. you can listen to the same station on a road trip and never hear 1 commercial....
fyi. i have had sirius for over 2 years and have not listened to terrestrial radio since. i dont know how people still do it. no commercials is worth 13 dollars a month to me...
-my 2 cents