Sirius, XM: What do Clear Channel and Georgetown have in common?
Friday, March 7, 2008 at 10:22 AM
Tags: 2, XM
Clear Channel Communications, Inc. and Georgetown Partners LLC would appear to be very different and distinct players in this debate over the merger between Sirius Satellite Radio Inc. and XM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc.
One is a corporate radio behemoth, famous for its pursuit of mergers and consolidation. The other is a minority-owned, private-equity firm that analyzes FCC regulated communications markets "for opportunities to extend minority ownership and control," as the firm says in its own words.
They couldn't be more different, right?
Well, except that they both oppose the Sirius-XM merger. Oh, and there's one more thing. It turns out that Clear Channel and Georgetown Partners have something very curious in common.
The two are using the same law firm to communicate with the FCC about the Sirius-XM merger. Both Clear Channel and Georgetown Partners are being represented by the Washington D.C. firm of Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker LLP.
In fact, while Clear Channel and Georgetown Partners initially filed comments with the FCC without the help of Paul, Hasting, Janofsky & Walker LLP; they both started using the same law firm at around the same time, in early November.
Since that period, Clear Channel and Georgetown Partners have filed a combined total of twenty-seven comments opposing the Sirius-XM merger, using the same law firm.
You can view the public FCC filings here.
Featured Entries
Search Orbitcast:
Latest Poll
Sponsored Links
Comments
Please, God, Allah, Bob Hope, anyone.... let this thing be over soon! Heal me or take me! It's like waiting for someone in a coma to either die or get better.
Posted by: Tim | March 7, 2008 10:49 AM
Looks like I have something in common with them, I ALSO oppose this merger.
Posted by: Anonymous Coward | March 7, 2008 11:05 AM
This deal is so dirty, it makes me ashamed to imagine that we're down to running government with nothing more than dirty tricks, veiled bribes, and political action committees.
FCC & DoJ = EPIC FAIL
Posted by: Mat | March 7, 2008 11:20 AM
Oh, this was a trick question.
I thought that they both employed Maxwell (Ben Bornstein)
oh well.
Posted by: RonAndFezNoonTo2:40 | March 7, 2008 11:48 AM
What are the odds that they both picked the same law firm. We all know we have a shortage of law firms in this country.
Posted by: Anonymous Coward | March 7, 2008 12:04 PM
Same law firm.
Same time.
Same point of opposition.
Gosh, I wonder if they're in cahoots on this??
Great find Ryan. Everyone needs to email the FCC and complain about this.
Posted by: xoxo | March 7, 2008 1:07 PM
If it's NAB, it's complaining and whining. But play the race card, and bammo, you have ammunition!
C'mon y'all. Help the Black Man.
NAB, you are the sleaziest, lowest, most pathetic wastes of oxygen on Planet Earth. I like the Taliban more than I like NAB.
Posted by: Mat | March 7, 2008 1:15 PM
How does Clear Channel gain by the deal being approved with Georgetown Partners getting what they are asking for?? I don't see it and Georgetown Partners doesn't get squat if CCU wins. So I think you are reading too much into this thing.
Posted by: Anonymous Coward | March 7, 2008 1:27 PM
How does Clear Channel gain by the deal being approved with Georgetown Partners getting what they are asking for?? I don't see it and Georgetown Partners doesn't get squat if CCU wins. So I think you are reading too much into this thing.
Posted by: Anonymous Coward | March 7, 2008 1:27 PM
Clear Channel gains by Georgetown getting what they are asking for by having a WEAKER competitor!
Posted by: Duh | March 7, 2008 3:09 PM
Perhaps CCU is paying the bills. Objective of both are same; CCU has a clear commercial interest whereas Georgetown's motives are less transparent.
xoxo,
There is nothing illegal about the two joining hands to state their case before the FCC. The last time we checked, the United States of America allows free speech. You too can file with the FCC and state your opinion. You can even join hands with Mat (above) and use the same legal firm. In fact you can use the same firm as Sirius or XM!
Posted by: CrossProfit | March 7, 2008 5:53 PM
Conflict of interest is still conflict of interest, and illegal. We can "join hands", but you can't file a de facto civil rights case as a company.
Think about it - NAB can't win, but saying it wrongs minorities has a chance. It's social arm-twisting, and truly a blight on the legal process.
Posted by: Mat | March 7, 2008 6:14 PM
orbitcast,
i'm pretty new to this site. Are any of these comments read by anyone who matters? This is a great website. I would hate for all of these opinions to go to waste. I love satellite radio, and would not like to see them edged out by these crooks. They need to get over it, satellite is the future. SIRIUS will make it either way!! Thank You
Posted by: Mike Scott | March 9, 2008 7:07 AM
idle and unemployed so great, that no law could prevent their http://idisk.mac.com/freemathclipartofnum/Public/0/winnie-the-pooh-clipart-for-baby.html >winnie the pooh clipart for baby infallibly diminish the use, and even the quantity too, which in oosewoovqs
Posted by: Mary | April 3, 2008 2:48 PM