Many of us have strong opinions on the XM-Sirius Merger, whether it's for or against it. Regardless on what side of the fence you're on, I think everyone wants to have the opportunity to let your opinion be heard.
If you're a regular reader here, you're probably more educated about these companies than anyone else. Your opinion weighs on considerations that the average person just has no clue about. And so it's your opinion that counts the most.
So do something about it!
Go to the FCC's Electronic Comment Submission form, and simply enter in "07-57" in the Proceeding box (upper-left). The rest is pretty self explanatory. Your comment will be sent directly to the FCC and put on file for consideration of the merger.
This is your chance to truly make your opinion count - again, regardless if you oppose the merger or are in favor of the merger. So get in there and submit a comment to the FCC. You'll feel warm and fuzzy inside afterwards.
Just keep in mind that hurling expletives at the FCC isn't the best way to get your voice heard...
Love the fact that Ryan provides us a forum to express ourselves and now we can contact the FCC and give them an intelligent response either for or against the merger. I have to skip this one for one big reason. I followed this potential merger very closely (like others here) and I still can't make up my mind how I feel about this. I guess it's 60/40 against the merger but I'm seeing positives to this XM/Sirius union and the NAB is annnoying me how aggressive they have been during this whole thing. So good luck to those who contact the F.C.C., I for one still have mixed feelings about it.
Well, that was easy enough. Thanks Orbitcast for making it easy.
That is one comment for the rights of the consumer sent to the FCC. I hope they listen and reject this merger.
Thanks for the link Ryan.
Thanks! I now have that peaceful, easy feeling going on. Oh, and warm fuzzies.
done - that was VERY easy... and hopefully effective!
To be honest, initially I could care less about a merger. Merger or no merger, I will keep my Sirius. It would be nice to have some XM content and so on. But the NAB crap has really rubbed me the wrong way. I hope the merger does go through.
I don't understand why any subscribers would be opposed to the merger.
Prices are not going up: management has guaranteed such, and they don't have the power to raise prices anyway, when there are so many free alternatives.
Selection is not going down: They'll have double the bandwidth (or even more than that with the new hierarchical modulation thing), so why would they have any reason to remove unique channels? If you're one of the five people who needs two Top 40 channels, then I'm sorry, you need to get a life.
This isn't like subscription TV, which for most people is a must have. Satellite radio is a nice little luxury product for people who are tired of terrestrial radio or don't like to fool around with CD's and iPods every day. Satrad doesn't have the power to try to squeeze a few more bucks out of each subscriber. They'll need to grab a lot more subscribers to make money, and it's not easy to convince people to pay for radio. If they try to charge more and serve less, then it will severely hurt their chances to get new subscribers and keep the old ones.
It basically comes down to this: Do you want 30 million checks per month for $13, or would you rather have 15 million checks for $15?
Mel has explicitly stated that he's more interested in getting the other 95% of America to buy into the satrad concept instead of trying to squeeze more out of the 5% that have already subscribed. If they're going to make a dent in that 95%, they have to make a more compelling product, and the merger gives them a clear leg up to do that.
If they do try to start screwing subscribers like me, then here's what I will do:
1. Pick up my phone
2. Dial the number for Sirius/XM
3. Tell them to cancel my subscription
It's that easy, and it's why the merged company wouldn't be stupid enough to try to screw subscribers.
It's a really great thing that you've posted this here and made it easy. I wanted to comment, but likely would have either forgotten or not known how to do so had I not seen it here.
I've sent in my comments opposing the merger, and I encourage anyone else who feels likewise to do the same. Or even those of you who I disagree with to do the same. We'll all be affected most by the merger, and all of our voices deserve hearing.
That was easy. Thanks Ryan.
Maybe they'll grow a conscience and do what is right for a change. Whooops. That convinced me... This merger will not happen.
Thanks Ryan, I did my part... in favor of the merger. Yay warm fuzzies!
boy about one hundred and twenty comments in under a day now lets go spread that link around..
Thanks Ryan, its a heated topic no matter which side you are on.
I am 100% against the merger because I just dont think the companies have our best interest at heart.
I worry that what they say and what they do will be two different things. I choose XM because I do not like Sirius, but yet it seems all the decisions are coming from the Sirius side..so for me as a subscriber to XM it makes me feel as if I will have to compromise.
If I am paying $20 a month (for 2 radios) I dont want to compromise, I want what I signed up for and not what they think is best but ultimately screws me.
JB said:
"Selection is not going down: They'll have double the bandwidth (or even more than that with the new hierarchical modulation thing), so why would they have any reason to remove unique channels?"
OK, Mel has said that no one's radio is going to be obsolete, right? That means that they will have to use both the XM and Sirius satellites to serve the same number of channels (or fewer). Both services are just about maxed-out at present, plus they want to offer some TV services. Each TV channel uses more bandwidth than audio-only, so where is this magical "extra" bandwidth (for audio) coming from?
Oh, I forgot: they will also want to offer all the sports that the two services now offer, many of which have their own dedicated channel(s).
There is ZERO bandwidth freed up by combining the two services, as far as I can see. Savings will be achieved by firing a lot of people and closing one of the two HQ's (my money is on D.C.).
JB wrote:
"I don't understand why any subscribers would be opposed to the merger.
Prices are not going up: management has guaranteed such, and they don't have the power to raise prices anyway, when there are so many free alternatives.
Selection is not going down: They'll have double the bandwidth (or even more than that with the new hierarchical modulation thing), so why would they have any reason to remove unique channels? If you're one of the five people who needs two Top 40 channels, then I'm sorry, you need to get a life.
This isn't like subscription TV, which for most people is a must have. Satellite radio is a nice little luxury product for people who are tired of terrestrial radio or don't like to fool around with CD's and iPods every day. Satrad doesn't have the power to try to squeeze a few more bucks out of each subscriber. They'll need to grab a lot more subscribers to make money, and it's not easy to convince people to pay for radio. If they try to charge more and serve less, then it will severely hurt their chances to get new subscribers and keep the old ones.
It basically comes down to this: Do you want 30 million checks per month for $13, or would you rather have 15 million checks for $15?
Mel has explicitly stated that he's more interested in getting the other 95% of America to buy into the satrad concept instead of trying to squeeze more out of the 5% that have already subscribed. If they're going to make a dent in that 95%, they have to make a more compelling product, and the merger gives them a clear leg up to do that.
If they do try to start screwing subscribers like me, then here's what I will do:
1. Pick up my phone
2. Dial the number for Sirius/XM
3. Tell them to cancel my subscription
It's that easy, and it's why the merged company wouldn't be stupid enough to try to screw subscribers."
----------------------
I don't understand why that many people are so blindly for the merger either.
Let me say that I am sitting around 60%/40% against the merger, and here's why.
As a dual subscriber, there is NOTHING that a merger will offer me that I don't already have. You say that "people that want two top 40 channels need to get a life", what about two rock, blues, jazz, and classical channels? If you're a dual-sub, you'll know that they are NOT the same. XM and Sirius have very different programming philosophies, and since the merger will eliminate what they "believe" to be redundant, they will eliminate channels. This TAKES AWAY choice!
You also mention doubling of bandwidth, but you're missing two things:
1) Mel said they'll operate as two seperate entities for the next 10 years or so, and
2) Even if they consolidate channels, they still have to rebroadcast the consolidated content on BOTH spectrums. This means ZERO bandwidth is saved.
Merging these companies also produces very little synergies that some analysts have claimed because of the fact that they use incompatible systems, and they will be operating as seperate entities for many years. Honestly, how much money is really saved by firing a few DJ's and consolidating channels? The only big saving will be the advertising, but nowhere near the "billions" of dollars claimed by these analysts.
Ask yourself one question: when has a merger *really* worked in favor of the *consumer*?
SatelliteRadioFan said it perfectly. My biggest concern is the elimination of music channels. I personally love XM's music programming. I enjoy Sirius sports talk like NFL Radio. By the way there is no better sports channel out there then Sirius NFL Radio. Sirius does a better then great job running that. Can't say they do as well with there music programming though. Which concerns me especially since Sirius is the one buying. I'm really afraid it’s going to resemble Sirius music programming rather then XM's. Which is better them terrestrial but I'd prefer to have two companies not one. But hopefully if they do merge Sirius/XM will have to give up one of there two licenses and we can have the possibility of another Satellite Radio company.
SatelliteRadioFan said:
"You also mention doubling of bandwidth, but you're missing two things:
1) Mel said they'll operate as two seperate entities for the next 10 years or so, and
2) Even if they consolidate channels, they still have to rebroadcast the consolidated content on BOTH spectrums. This means ZERO bandwidth is saved."
Exactly what I was trying to say, SRF. You just said it more clearly than I did.
"Merging these companies also produces very little synergies that some analysts have claimed because of the fact that they use incompatible systems, and they will be operating as seperate entities for many years."
Yup. They have a lot of money tied up in those satellites and they HAVE to service two incompatible systems for at least the short term so there is NO "savings" in terms of bandwidth while that is happening.
"Ask yourself one question: when has a merger *really* worked in favor of the *consumer*?"
Another great point that I SHOULD have made in my posting. I would submit that "savings for the consumer" is NEVER the reason for a merger. They don't give even a small shit about the consumer saving money. Large corporations exist to make money for their stockholders...and lowering prices doesn't make THAT happen.
Companies merge so that they can more closely approximate a monopoly. Period.
If they don't merge, will either even be around in 2 years?
Wow, I started thinking today about how programmed all of our thinking has become. It just dawned on me that we are all arguing over how the FCC should rule based on “what’s good for the consumer”.
Have we as Americans really been brained washed into thinking that our Government should be stepping in to maintain control over little non harmful business matters? Think about it, no one is going to be physically harmed if XM and Sirius merge.
So what If we as consumers wind up paying $3 bucks more a month for a product anyone can get for free. This is America; shouldn’t a company be trying to make a profit?
These two companies are providing jobs, they pay taxes, provide a service to the public, and they are not harming anyone. If they cannot become profitable EVERYONE loses in the end, artist, investors, employees, manufacturers, banks, and us customers.
Honestly, should the Government even be involved in this simple matter?
I’m willing to pay a few bucks more a month so an American company can make a profit.
How can anyone think this is a monoply. It is just one of many options. But an attractive one that a lot of people will pay for if it delivers at a fair price. But the market is not big eneough for multiple players. And not critical enough to keep anyone from cancelling for the smallest displeasure. The way I see it is there will be one or none. The pie is just not big enough for two. But no matter what happens I will rarely ever listen to land radio. I don't need a continuous commercial.