This morning's Inside Radio newsletter featured an article that stated "Analyst: XM+Sirius+HD is likely" - an article that now appears to have disappeared from their website.
Who knows the reasons as to why the article looks to be missing... but thanks to the beauty of the interweb, it can now be preserved for all posterity to enjoy:
Analyst: XM+Sirius+HD is likely.
Stifel Nicolaus analyst Blair Levin thinks it's likely the FCC will require such a mandate as part of its approval of the deal, as well as a requirement that any new receivers include terrestrial HD capabilities. Meanwhile, U.S. Electronics is pushing the FCC to hold a summit among a number of parties citing a "newly emerged consensus" that a combined XM-Sirius be required to make their receiver technology "open" allowing more choices for consumers. Among those backing the requirement are iBiquity and the HD Digital Radio Alliance.
The report citing Stifel's assertions probably came from last week's note, where HD Radio was listed among a list of several other possible concessions. Others possibilities that Levin included in his report were public interest programming, price freezes, and lower priced packages.
But then again, a headline reading "Analyst: XM+Sirius = Lower Prices" probably wouldn't make Inside Radio's readership too happy.
Thanks Gary!
"XM + Sirius + HD is likely... no wait, maybe not."
Ryan, that is the funniest headline I have ever seen on Orbitcast and kind of sums up the entire merger process perfectly. LOL
That is absurd. If they make it a requirement, I hope that:
1. The HD folks pay the cost of inserting yet another chip into the radios (there goes the small portable)
2. The HD folks pay for the research required to get the chipset small enough
3. That all HD radio makers include XM/Sirius in their radios (what's good for the goose...)
4. A claification of "HD capable" is provided - if it's a simple port to add HD to an XM/Sirius unit, I'm fine with that...that way, we can opt out of the additional cost for the sat radio
"That all HD radio makers include XM/Sirius in their radios (what's good for the goose...)"
Exactly! If these are two separate non-competing entities, this should not be a problem for the HD folks.
"HD Radio is trying to kill the wrong technology"
"The FCC will never, ever do this, of course. You could file all day and in a rainbow of colors and it won't make a difference. When push comes to shove, this merger will be going through. And it will go through without a "tip of the hat" towards HD radio. But as symbolism goes, it's symbolically symbolic."
http://www.hear2.com/2008/01/hd-radio-is-try.html
Ramsey believes interoperable satrad/HD receivers won't happen. The receivers would be very complex and expensive, and manufacturers would have to be convinced to develop them:
"Regarding the Technical Aspects of the SDARS Providers XM and Sirius"
"There are significant differences in certain technical aspects of the two SDARS systems as deployed by XM and Sirius. The systems as currently deployed are not interoperable. That is to say, an XM receiver cannot receive the Sirius signal and vice versa. Thus, as is true today, if the proposed merger of XM and Sirius were consummated, consumers would still need to purchase a new interoperable receiver in order to receive the signals of both providers. These differences in system operation, function, and structure make the design and implementation of a single unified and interoperable receiver both complex and expensive. In fact, both XM and Sirius have been working in a joint venture to develop an interoperable radio since 2000. At this time, no interoperable radios have been introduced into commercial production."
http://tinyurl.com/2kek8t
Satrad is already in trouble - good-luck, covincing consumers to pay 2x - 3x times more for interoperable receivers, plus, auto manufacturers can veto anything in-dash.
Perhaps XM/Sirius should have iPod integration, WiFi and 3G access....wait, I just described my Mac...
iband - The terrible thing about it is that satellite radio manufacturers would most probably end up paying iBiquity a royalty for each satellite radio manufactured and sold in such a situation. Also, the growth curve (assuming there is one) of satellite radio would be tied to the growth of HD from the point of merger forward. This would be a horrible situation.
It sounds utterly ridiculous, which would be consistent with the rest of the views put forth by Stifel's analysts.
Although, I am sure XM/SIRI would gladly go along, provided --
a) HD had to absorb 1/3 of the costs of all OEM installs, and
b) XM and SIRI's payments for the use of music would be reduced to match HD's.
First of all, that fact that the article disappeared speaks volumes, and besides why would a merged XM-Sirius want a krappy radio tuner in their receiver which would only devalue it? IBOC just doesn't work properly unless you live within line of sight of the transmitter. Putting IBOC in a Satellite receiver would be like including a film projector in a DVD player. HD's dead in the water and the worms who are still pushing it want desperately to hitch it to something which is successful. they have done NOTHING to warrant a free ride like they want.
I just pre-ordered my new XM radio. It has Sirius, HD Radio, a betamax player and an 8-track player. It's huge, but it's fair to all audio sources.
I would be OK if they required the XM/Sirius radios had an auxillary input so that ALL other competing devices could be played, such as HD, iPod, other MP3, etc. But to require HD is catering to and kissing the ass of the NAB. I would be shocked if the FCC could do that with a straight face.