XM shareholders approve merger - Orbitcast

XM shareholders approve merger

| 45 Comments

XM, Sirius merger approvedXM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc. stockholders have voted to approve the merger with Sirius Satellite Radio Inc, at its special meeting of stockholders today.

The preliminary tabulation indicates that 99.8 percent of the shares voted were cast in favor of the merger with Sirius.

So there's the stamp of approval from the shareholders, next up is the DOJ and FCC.

UPDATE: You may have seen this post earlier today with some slightly different numbers. They were incorrect and the post was temporarily pulled until the real numbers came in. Sorry for the confusion.

45 Comments

can you find anywhere how many votes were cast in total for each XM and SIRI?

99.8% is impressive...but if only 20% of the outstanding shares voted...eyebrows will be slightly raised.

sad... but it looks like I will let my subscription run out. I will have nothing to do with Mels company.

I hope Hugo Chavez can come stop the merger and provide use with some decent socialist values. In related news, my anti-merger tinfoil hat has seemed to stop working.

Yeah I might rip out my dishwasher bc I dont like Immelt. Come to think of it Steve Jobs is kinda ugly so anyone need an ipod? Its weird how in love some people are with this company..Its a stock, not a girlfriend..

dumpus:

At least 50.1% of the shares outstanding voted, since an abstention is considered a "no" (.50/.998).

•jeff'- 'sad... but it looks like I will let my subscription run out. I will have nothing to do with Mels company.'

I really don't see where Mel has anything to do with XM's shareholders voting to approve the merger. Didn't XM let their shareholders know of what the merger would be like for stcoks and the company direction? Mel doesn't control that information because he's not in charge of XM. So why not blame Parsons? Or why not just blame XM for leading it's inverstors in the same direction the you XMers say the Sirius subscribers are sheep for following?

The problem is that even if you were to combine the amount of stock held in either company by people who frequent here, or XM411, or XMFan, or any of the other satrad-related blogs or forums, and who actually have a vested interest in the programming, the choice of music and songs, the talent, and so many other aspects of the way these two companies have operated, you'd see those people representing less than a hundredth of a percent of the total outstanding shares. The deciding factor in shareholder votes of any sizeable company is going to be limited to the high rollers and the investment groups who hold them in their gigantic portfolios, to the tune of hundreds of thousands of shares and beyond. Once you own that many shares of a company, you're voting for whatever's going to make that stock price go up, and in this case, over the long run, that's a merger of these two companies. I don't like it either, but it's been pretty clear all along that the only hope of this getting shot down was going to come from either the DoJ or FCC, and even now I'm beginning to fear the FCC might let this one go by.

WHY????

Our last hope is the FCC.


Then it's MP3.

It's all good... It's all good... It's all good... yipee the merger will happen if you are a stock holder.. This is the opposite for those who would rather it not happen (like me).. ok, I've been Mr. Waffle about this merger but the more the big wigs say it is good and right for everyone and all that b.s. the more I think I side with the minority of subs who don't want this.. I felt a year or so ago about the rumored merger that it might be good but when it was announced, I changed my mind.. and have waffled back and forth and to and fro and up and down and over and under, who's on first, what...

The merger is beyond our control. Before everyone jumps ship on sat radio, let's see/hear what it's like after the merger. While I've been an XM diehard since 12-2001, I'm not jumping ship just because of the merger. If it sucks after the merger, then I'll bail. Until then, I'm sticking around. They just better leave Top Tracks, Deep Tracks and Fine Tuning alone!!

I want to see one subscriber complain that they can get the NFL and MLB on one radio with one sub. I just want to see one guy complain about this after the merger. Just one.

Damn it I wish I could get baseball and football on 2 subscriptions instead of one! LOL!!!!

Agreed iband. You made a better point than I just lashed out at the angry XM fans for about the shareholders. I'm a lifetime subscriber to Sirius. I'm sure things are going to change and have already since I've been a subscriber. Channels have changed or dropped or been added, NHL went over to XM...I'd still pay to hear commercial free music. Have any of you been listening to regular radio? Awful. I care about the stations I get now, but if a few stations change, it's going to be a little understandable as a business going through a small re-learning curve of pleasing it's fans on both sides...which is what it's going to have to keep doing to keep subscribers coming in and maintaining all the current ones. I'm still for the merger and once it passes it's Sirius/XM's responsibility to keep their word on what they promised. I just don't see being so negative before anything's even happened yet to alter any of what we're getting now from both XM and Sirius.

>>> I want to see one subscriber complain that they can get the NFL and MLB on one radio with one sub. I just want to see one guy complain about this after the merger. Just one.

There has been no guarantee made that a single radio will receive both sports, even if you are paying the double subscription fee. The jury is very much out on whether such radios will ever come to market. And certainly they won't in the near term. While it would be possible we could see them at retail within a year, it is at least as likely you'll not see them in the foreseeable future UNLESS FCC makes it a condition of the merger.


he jury is very much out on whether such radios will ever come to market. And certainly they won't in the near term. While it would be possible we could see them at retail within a year, it is at least as likely you'll not see them in the foreseeable future UNLESS FCC makes it a condition of the merger.>>>

Then why bother merging if they don't intend having capable hardware? You keep harping on this without giving any reason for it.

jeff ,

is only angry because he lost a ton on XM stock probably. Letting his radio subscription run out only shows ignorance. Did you get XM just because you owned the stock and they would have one more sub thinking it would make a difference in the stock price? Makes no sense to me, and a foolish comment and way to handle anything on your part. What Jeff fails to realize too, is that in a year or two this company is going to be huge and probably trading about $20 a share making money hand over fist. Then your stock is worth actually almost $100 a share if you are getting 4.6 per XM share. NOT TOO SHABBY!

Interoperable radios are coming to market, the patents have already been filed and approved. Relax!

Oh BTW, MEL is a genious and knows the media market too well. He has alot of merger experience and you can bet this is going to go smooth and the customers will get the best treatment.

Also, I have confirmed, and someone raised the question earlier, about possibly not getting all the sports on both type radios. Yes, you will get all the sports no matter what radio you own. Its not going to be that hard for them to do this and it will happen. As interoperable radios come out, and new sats are launched this may change. Just like there will be no more Analog TV signals broadcast as of Feb 2009, the same may happen with two different radios, but its not going to happen tomorrow.

Well I guess we only have the FCC and DOJ to prevent this merger from going through! Please stop it!

>>>> Then why bother merging if they don't intend having capable hardware? You keep harping on this without giving any reason for it.

Why would you think merging has anything to do with it? They could have done it without the merger. There is no significant market for dual-capable receivers. Both managements have stated this numerous times -- they said words to the effect of, "We developed a prototype, which FCC required us to to. To date, there are no manufacturers willing to build the receiver, and we're not going to subsidize it.". Why? Because it will be substantially more expensive than the current receivers, and people aren't going to be willing to pay more for a receiver when they don't intend to subscribe to both services in the first place.

The purpose of the merger, IMO, is that it is the only way Mel knows to "grow" a business -- and it buys SIRI more cover for the horror that is the Stern deal and he did a first-rate sales job on the institutions that owned 90% of XM.

If you want a dual capable receiver, the only way you're going to get it is if FCC insists on it.

so the fcc told them by mandate and in spirt to deliver a interoperable device

first one of the companys indicated by action foget about it..then the other company said ok lets do this another way lets just merge and we all win longer term .and im ok with that concept also...

that said the fcc should not hand them a free pass on this issue without airing fully the reason and logic that explains why the publics interest was not served as mandated.via interoperable devices which at least one company was very vocal about claiming the device was on the way...pre merge,r now they state in filings no merger no dual device period.

something is clearly wrong with that logic.

im sorry,

Kevin Said
"What Jeff fails to realize too, is that in a year or two this company is going to be huge and probably trading about $20 a share making money hand over fist. Then your stock is worth actually almost $100 a share if you are getting 4.6 per XM share. NOT TOO SHABBY!"

I Say... Ha Ha Ha ROTFLMAO 20 bucks a share? with just short of 3 billion and a valuation of 16X earings do you realize how many subscribers they will need? I doubt you do. I'll give you a hint... its 28 million subscribers more than what they need to pay the bills. So.. if each company needs another 2 million subs now. ass together the 7.5 and 8.5 add the 4 million to 28 million ... thats 48 million subscribers... Ramp rates show Sat rad topping out in the 22 to 28 million range. and thats just about break even after Synergies.

I have listend to Sirius... play lists are not as deep. It's far better than FM but its not as good as XM. I could care less about O&A, Howard or any sport. XM did not need the merger.

Mel is a very taleneted leader in Radio. He has many connections. this is all well and good. he made tons of money for Viacom investors. How? 20 minuites per hour of comercials... this is exactly why I went to Sat Rad in the first place.

Synergies? I say Bull Shit. OOOH now they will only have to pay for one BBC world news chanel. Like this is a big expense? They both still have the Howard contract as well as the NBA, NFL, NHL NASCAR, Oprah, Martha, and who the hell else they offered a truck load of cash to. These are the 2nd biggest expenses. Whats the first? Long term Debt.. together they have 2.8 Billion in debt. Together their debt pyment structure comes too fast and will need to be refinanced.

XM has been depreciating its system at a much faster rae than Sirius. Why? 46 million last Q compared to Sirius depreciating 20 million? This is the Fudge Factor. XM has been having losses that matched Sirius's cause they deleveraged debt, payed down mortgages and depreciated their system faster than Sirius.

XM was much better without Sirius.

I still have 3 years on my subscription... So when I said I will let it run out, You assumed I pay month by month? Typical American Idiot.

So.. who is going to tell me how much better sirius is caus etheir subs last longer?? Thats an old argument with zero thought to the average subsriber time and the disconect fees charged by one company.

Whats that? Retail? lets not go there either. Gross subs have een nearly Identical... Sirius does better in retail cause there are less OEM's out there with a receiver.

Whats that? Ramp Rate? we could beat that to death and most people still wont get it.


Am I angry... Damn Strait I am. XM was a haven from the crap I used to have to endure at WNEW or WXRK... both Mel's stations at the time. I have endured year after year of XM reporting and Sirius reporting a day or two later only to spin their report to sound better than XM's. Is anyone going to tell me that Sirius Executives have no Idea of the Churn from Chrysler subscribers?


The Slow death of a fantastic product began when the bidding wars stared 3 years ago. Now we all have a front row seat.

both sirius and xmsr have filed new documents to the fcc site some of which are in reply to other documents filed in the docket ...

none of the filings mention dual or interoperal devices which is central to this issue and was mandated....to help drive the industry forward while servicing the publics needs via a shared cost on the device. say what you will something is clearly wrong imho


the fcc needs to tell the public what went wrong if anything did.....?

"There has been no guarantee made that a single radio will receive both sports, even if you are paying the double subscription fee. The jury is very much out on whether such radios will ever come to market. And certainly they won't in the near term. While it would be possible we could see them at retail within a year, it is at least as likely you'll not see them in the foreseeable future UNLESS FCC makes it a condition of the merger."

This is absolute BS. There is no way after merger these companies wouldn't market interoperable radios. Now if you don't want to not believe what they have said (that they will market such radios as soon as possible after merger) then believe this- the economics of the merger make such radios very profitable. Why do you think the car companies are so in favor of this merger? So they can have interoperable radios in every car they sell, so costumers can get whatever service they want.

There is no question whatsoever that they will have interoperable radios after merger.

The issue of Baseball and Football on the same radio has absolutely nothing to do with interoperable radios. Sirius and XM have already announced that they will be doing a best of deal on existing radios.

AND they sat in front of Congress and said no longer will subscribers have to choose between baseball or football, Howard or O&A, Oprah or Martha Stewart etc.

MUSCLE13: "Sirius and XM have already announced that they will be doing a best of deal on existing radios.

AND they sat in front of Congress and said no longer will subscribers have to choose between baseball or football, Howard or O&A, Oprah or Martha Stewart etc."


You keep believing this line without realizing that XM and Sirius *MUST* renegotiate contracts with the sports organizations before they can be broadcast on the other service.

Mel made a promise he cannot deliver without fixing this issue first.

Stop believing everything Mel tells you.

Back on topic:

Why is this a surprise to anyone? Investors are the ones that need a merger to save their portfolios. Plain and simple.


Now I dare anyone to do a survey of listeners, not investors, and see what the result would be.

I bet it would be a lot different than these results.

Oh, and not sugar coat it by including what Mel "promises".

SatelliteRadioFan - The best of plan is in documents filed with the FCC. He said it not to me or you or other listeners. He said it to the government in written documents. Thus most likely we see it as a condition of the merger.

How much more clear cut can it be?

satelitte radio fan,
You forgot the 187 million fee for backing out of the merger... if the shareholders did not aprove the merger...

>>>>>>>There is no way after merger these companies wouldn't market interoperable radios. Now if you don't want to not believe what they have said (that they will market such radios as soon as possible after merger) then believe this- the economics of the merger make such radios very profitable.

If this were true we would have seen interoperable radios already. The merger has nothing to do with how "profitable" such receivers would be.

>>>>>>> You keep believing this line without realizing that XM and Sirius *MUST* renegotiate contracts with the sports organizations before they can be broadcast on the other service.

This is certainly a major factor. There is no reason for NFL or MLB to just say, "Oh, sure, we'll let you broadcast our content to twice as many listeners for no additional money". Not going to happen. The other thing is that Sirius simply doesn't have the bandwidth available to carry 5,000 MLB games.

Muscle, the self-acclaimed media expert, seems to have a difficult time understanding these inherent problems.

I'm not saying it can't be done, because XM has some pretty smart people doing this stuff; but at this point, I've not seen anyone cogently articulate a scenario in which it could happen. And Muscle certainly hasn't been able to do so. I'm amazed that he keeps bringing it up given his inability to do so.

>>>MUSCLE:"The best of plan is in documents filed with the FCC. He said it not to me or you or other listeners. He said it to the government in written documents."

He said it to all of us, as well as the government. He is telling them, and us, exactly what he wants us to hear so the merger gets approved as quickly as possible. Why would he do it any other way?

>>>"Thus most likely we see it as a condition of the merger."

"Most likely", not definite. There's a difference. Mel is smart, I'll give him that, but he's talking the talk. We'll see if he walks the walk.

Stack, with all do respect, if the contracts have to be renegotiated, they will. Since XM and Sirius, even after merger, will for the most part remain separate streams, (that is, you have to pay the same amount after merger to have both subscriptions) I'm not sure they will have to be renegotiated. MLB will still be available (after merger) only on XM and the NFL will still only be available on Sirius. The difference is that one will be able to purchase a radio that can get both XM and Sirius.

Stack, the reason that hasn't been done yet, is that XM and Sirius have to subsidize these radios. Why would Sirius subsidize a radio if the ultimate listener will only listen and PAY for XM on it? Now do you get why after merger that won't be a problem?

Even if contacts have to be renegotiated, and I'm not sure they will, why is that such a problem? Why would the NFL or MLB have any objection to more people listening to their games? If there is more money to be made, they will want a portion of it, BIG SURPRISE. To think this will stop Sirius/XM from making the NFL and MLB available on one radio is very, very short-sighted of you. (in my honest, humble, opinion)...

If there was even the slightest chance that baseball and football wouldn't be available to both XM and Sirius subs after the merger, this merger would have never even been discussed by Sirius or XM in my honest opinion.

You don't need to know anything about media to understand that. You need to just have common sense. The merger is meaningless without merging content.

And they have filed documents with the government about the merging of content. Get Real!

Wow mucle, I thought you were somewhat intelligent, your posts of late are the rantings of a crazy person.

Sports have never been part of any "best of". The NFL & MLB don't need sdars pennies. The big boys don't undervalue their product just to get some table scraps. If the $ isn't there, they will take no deal over an undervalued one. And the current deal does not allow for either sport to be rebroadcast. That would undervalue the content of each league.

If the merger goes through there will never be an interroperable receiver. Why would there be? What are they going to play? If cost savings are to be realized through efficiencies such as eliminating dual programming why would you want a radio that for the price of 2 subs gets you the same decades channels, the Boneyard on XM & Sirius, Octane on XM & Sirius, Shitty Greatful Dead Channel on XM & Sirius, etc. You'll be paying for a more expensive radio, dual sub and you'll get less than the 300 individually unique stations you get today. Great deal.

Man Ryan, this is some crew. LOL I don't know how you deal with it. You have to get a kick out of it.

And Muscle again ignores questions because he can't answer them. Eyes wide shut.

Your whole approach to this merger is that "Mel said this. Mel said that. He said it to politicians so it can't be wrong, it must be true."

Mel is a politician and he has said nothing that is concrete. But if you want to believe he has, he said that sports will not be part of any "best of" package.

Hoo Hoo, Mel. Now I can get my raise. If these bastards want some content from both services, there going to get it on their existing receivers, and they're going to pay through the nose for it. Hoo Hoo

You got it, Hoo Hoo. We're both going to get a big raise at their expense. Let's have a shareholders' party to celebrate the shake-down of our stupid subscribers.

Guys, I am not saying that the sports won't be offered as merged content. I am saying that it is not something that will be available right after the merger, and certainly not available immediately as "best-of".

If you knew any "common sense" about how sports contracts work, it's not a five minute phone call with a cup of coffee. These organizations are in the position to want substantially more money to broadcast on both spectrums. Get it?

Will they demand more money? Maybe, maybe not, but Mel is no position to automatically assume that the organizations will go through without compensation. It may happen, it may not.

The sports organizations know that XM/SIRI needs them far more than they need XM/SIRI.

>>>rjr: "Stack, with all do respect, if the contracts have to be renegotiated, they will. Since XM and Sirius, even after merger, will for the most part remain separate streams, (that is, you have to pay the same amount after merger to have both subscriptions) I'm not sure they will have to be renegotiated. MLB will still be available (after merger) only on XM and the NFL will still only be available on Sirius. The difference is that one will be able to purchase a radio that can get both XM and Sirius."


rjr, I didn't see your post until after I typed mine, but at least you grasp the concept I was trying to get across: contract renegotiations, or something that is settled with dual-band receivers until the renegotiations take place.

The question remains: How much more money (if any) will these organizations want to rake from XM/SIRI?

>>>> The difference is that one will be able to purchase a radio that can get both XM and Sirius

This is, as yet, undetermined. Believe it when you see it.

>>>> Stack, the reason that hasn't been done yet, is that XM and Sirius have to subsidize these radios. Why would Sirius subsidize a radio if the ultimate listener will only listen and PAY for XM on it? Now do you get why after merger that won't be a problem?

No, the argument is nonsense. The ONLY reason for a dual capable receiver is to permit the listener access to both services. A merger DOES NOT INCREASE the likelihood of a dual subscriber, and in fact, it HUGE DECREASES that likelihood -- since a substantial part of the programming will be identical (the music channels are to be merged, so there is only one set of music channels for the two services. You will not have both XM's 60s channel and SIRI's, you won't have both services blues or classical channels, etc. -- you'll have a single set of channels). Why, in hell, would anyone pay for a receiver to get THAT? They won't, and XM/SIRI know it.

If they couldn't justify subsidizing such receivers before the merger, they sure as hell can't afterward. And they won't, unless they're forced to.

>>>> Even if contacts have to be renegotiated, and I'm not sure they will, why is that such a problem?

Of course they will. Sirius does not just get rights to MLB by virtue of a merger with XM. If they want it, they have to pay for it. XM's contract with MLB is certainly not assignable to a new organization.

>>> Why would the NFL or MLB have any objection to more people listening to their games? If there is more money to be made, they will want a portion of it, BIG SURPRISE.

But XM/SIRI cannot afford to spend more for this content. Between NFL & MLB they've spent a billion dollars. Even if they increased by only half that (Peck claims it will be 5%, but that's bull) the merged company cannot afford it. But honestly, rights are only the smaller part of the problem -- Sirius just doesn't have the bandwidth to put up 5,000 MLB games. They don't have it, can't get it.

>>> To think this will stop Sirius/XM from making the NFL and MLB available on one radio is very, very short-sighted of you. (in my honest, humble, opinion)...

When you boil it down, the question is whether they will create a dual-capable receiver solely for people to be able to get NFL and MLB (they'll be able to get "best of" Sirius on XM (that would have to be Stern) and vice-versa.

There aren't enough listeners to either MLB or NFL, IMO, to build a receiver just for those listeners. NOBODY ELSE IS GOING TO BE A DUAL SUBSCRIBER, BECAUSE THE MUSIC CONTENT WILL BE LARGELY THE SAME ON BOTH SERVICES.

The dual-capable receiver is a much more attractive device now (pre-merger) than after a merger occurs.

I, for one, refuse to buy a radio until they come out with a dual receiver. I'm not going to spend that much on a radio just to get half of the content. But I also refuse to pay $26/month total. Until then, I'm sticking with internet radio - it's doesn't have as much content, but there's no extra cost and it's good enough to get me through the work day.

I know I'm in the minority, but there are still a lot of us out here Stack. Just because you don't like both services doesn't mean nobody else does. You're not exactly the unbiased voice of reason here, which should be obvious to everyone by now. If they can come up with a complete dual service (not just a best of) for less than $20/month, there will be plenty of interested subscribers.

And I think that Gary Parsons made it pretty clear that the unique music offerings on each service will remain, since they don't want to lose subscribers. And getting rid of music channels doesn't really save them any money anyway, since they still have to pay the same royalty regardless. So basically, they have neither the incentive nor the power to cut music channels without repercussions. Yes, maybe one of the 2 Top 20 stations is in jeopardy, but Lucy and Bob Dylan are safe. Why do you think they'd get rid of channels which people specifically chose XM over Sirius (and vice versa)? Do they not need those subscription dollars? Will the merger prevent people from canceling the service if they don't like it anymore?

>>> If they can come up with a complete dual service (not just a best of) for less than $20/month, there will be plenty of interested subscribers.

There is no evidence that I know of that supports your claim. OTOH, my position is well supported by the fact that retail all but died for both services this year. If you cannot sell someone 170 channels, what makes you think you can sell them 300? It is sort of obvious that this isn't a factor.

>>> And I think that Gary Parsons made it pretty clear that the unique music offerings on each service will remain

I'm not sure where you got this idea. According to Peck, who is usually pretty well-connected with his information, half of the in-house production budget will be slashed within two years. I agree the savings aren't huge, but it is part of the basis for his synergies estimate.

After all, if they're going to save money, it has to come from somewhere.

It is a fact that they have tried to suggest these changes aren't coming in order to get support for the merger (although they have admitted such plans exist, they certainly aren't about to provide any details at this point). But the cold, hard reality is that it has to happen. Where we are heading isn't to 300 distinct channels -- the game plan is to offer ~70 channels of music on each service, and many, if not most of those channels will be duplicate broadcasts on both services.

The entire argument to the contrary is ridiculous. Why would they produce two 70s channels (doubling production costs), then spend massively more money on receiver subsidies so you can get both of those channels? They wouldn't and they won't.

We are headed to a single owner, monolithic service -- and if you believe otherwise you have been hoodwinked.

Just so you know, I have had both XM and Sirius and actually dropped sirus in favor of XM.

Merger will
- Take the best both companies have to offer, and make one superior radio company. If XM play lists are drawing more people, why in the world would sirius alienate 7M listeners?

- "Play lists aren't as deep"- How in the world is the most repetitive channel in all of satellite radio ranked #2? Oh, because people want to hear their favorite songs over and over, until they become old and move on.
- I'm not knocking deeper play lists, but its obvious what is attracting customers

- "I'm sick of hearing about synergy"
- Contracts dont have to be out of the stratosphere because there isn't a bidding war.
- Two people don't get paid 50,000 per year to do the exact same job.
- Not paying two sets of royalty fee's for playing music
- Lower overhead in advertising
- I could go on for another page if you would like...

Just some observations to some of the posts I've seen. If you like radio, satrad is really the only choice. HD (hybrid-digital) Radio is going to be the same old, commercial filled junk. There something about IPODs that I just don't like. I cant put my finger on it, but I would much rather listen to radio, could just be a bias I have.


Matt


>>> - "Play lists aren't as deep"- How in the world is the most repetitive channel in all of satellite radio ranked #2? Oh, because people want to hear their favorite songs over and over, until they become old and move on.
>>> - I'm not knocking deeper play lists, but its obvious what is attracting customers

I think you're confused here. XM has deep playlists on some channels, shallow on others. The point is their music content, overall, is far better than SIRI's. The strategy is detailed here:

http://mfile.akamai.com/20469/wmv/xmradio.download.akamai.com/20469/leesBlog/LeeHIGH.asx

>>>> Contracts dont have to be out of the stratosphere because there isn't a bidding war.

Which contracts were out of the stratosphere due to a bidding war? XM wasn't bidding for Stern. SIRI volunteered the ridiculous 3/4 billion payment.

>>>> - Not paying two sets of royalty fee's for playing music

These are based on a percentage of revenue. The merger won't change them. At all.

>>>> - Two people don't get paid 50,000 per year to do the exact same job.

We are told by both managements that the NYC and DC headquarters will both be maintained. Yes, you'll save a few dollars by eliminating some duplication in management, and you'll save a few by broadcasting the same content on both services. But these aren't big numbers to begin with, thus, the savings won't be big.

>>>> - Lower overhead in advertising

They could possibly save $50 Million a year in this area -- EXCEPT they damned well need to spend the money since they've never had a meaningful marketing campaign.

$50 Million a year won't even cover the additional costs they incur as a result of the merger.