you can not compare it to cable....you do know there is more than one cable provider???
there may only be one in YOUR area, but nationally there is a good many providers with more coming along.
you also know that all cable comanies MUST negotiate to simulcast the free air stations??? they don't just have it...they buy it and simulcast it.

i do agree that the consumer could gain the most from the merger, but it could also turn around and hurt the consumer by not having other companies competing for the same business. (they run into money troubles..like they both are...and they would raise the price rather than fix the issue)
Mel has already stated the cost analysis was at 28.00 a month (XM + Sirius sub price).
Mel went before congress and said the sub's (notice the plural) price would not be raised above the 12.95 it currently is. (so now the price is 25.90...12.95(XM) + 12.95(Sir)).
i'm not saying this is written in stone, but it does not sound good to me...

 

you talk like you're being forced to listen to satellite radio or something. you do have a choice, and it's not 'satellite radio or no radio'. so what if they raise the price to $250 a month? they know full well (probably better than you) that if they raise the price too much, nobody will be willing to pay it and they will lose out anyway. if you decide it gets too expensive... don't listen!

personally, I don't have cable tv because it's too expensive and I don't watch enough. I use my rabbit ears and get to see plenty. nobody is forcing me to pay for cable, just like nobody is forcing anyone to pay for satellite radio.

 

you do know that you don't have to pay for a cell phone, or cable tv...or even sat.tv...

but they know that once they have you, they can edge the prices up...and up....and up.
a quick look at the current cable bill i got shows this. (just 3 years ago my bill was 20.00 cheaper with no improvement on my end of the deal).

while you don't have to get these things...you will want to be a part of civilization. (the same reason you have internet access...)

now, i don't need this sat radio...but i don't want to see there only be one provider. it can not be good for the consumer that will want these.

letting them create a monopoly, is the same as letting groups ban words from the english language.
whether you want to pay for it or not should not stop you from realizing this, ultimatly, is a bad thing.

 

DUDE!...I love my Sirius radio!...They haave a station called "BackSpin"....Damn thats the BESTEST!!...they play Old School Rap stuff I havent heard in years & years!!

 

Yes, I'm aware that there are other cable providers. The point I"m making about that is that when you have cable, you don't have two to choose from that each have different programming. You don't have to have one to watch football and you don't have to have the other to watch baseball, unlike Satellite radio. The consumer benefits.

How would a different satillite company's competition make them any more competitive. They are competing with FREE right now. They and the terrestrial radios are competing with Ipod and internet downloading. Competing with FREE services, even HD radio, is the best competition of all.

OT a bit but Sirius did report positive cash flow just recently. And I whole heartedly believe that if Mel goes to the FCC and what was it, the congressional commity, and promises, as part of the "for the consumer benefit", that the price of their services will not go up, then I believe that they will not go up. I'm sure that if they did, they would be in a world of hurt for doing so.

****

Did anyone here the inventor/creator of Satillite radio on the Stern show? What a great interview that was! She's quite an amazing person! I didn't know that she created the whole deal and that it was all originally Sirius. I hope Marteen (or however it's spelled) comes back on the Stern show often.

 

That is your *choice* to continue paying them more and more.

***THIS JUST IN: If you don't have satellite radio, then you're not civilized!***


Wow. ...just wow. And you said cruise ships were a bad analogy!

 

in my area i have 5 different choices for TV programming...2 sat tv service companies, one cable company, one fiber optic, and the best free air tv...

each of these (with the exception of free air tv) has different programming choices. all of the free air stations by me has simulcast options.
this has helped the consumers in my area.

one sat.tv has football...the other has baseball...just like sat radio.

sat. radio is trying to attract listeners from free radio, but is not competeing with free radio.

when free radio allows cursing(or does not censor its content) and goes comercial free then it is competeing.
the free radio market around me sucks. there is not one rock station, there is not one alternative station...there is no competition.

dish network and direct tv are competing...
98.7 and 103.5 are competing...
XM and Sirus are competing..

direct tv does not compete with 98.7...
sat radio does not compete with 103.5...

 

1. yes, it is MY choice who to pay, and how much i am comfortable paying...
if they raise the rates...i will not be a customer anymore...but it is MY call.

2. don't be an idiot...qoute it correctly...
and that goes for internet access...you don't have to pay for it, but sooner or later you will want to be a part of the advancing civilization that does have it.

3. i know it might be hard for you to grasp...but america has stopped the monopolies because it is bad for the citizens.
america has rights allowing freedom of speech, because censor ship is bad for the citizens.

there is a group trying to get the word 'f-a-g-o-t' banned from our language.
another group is trying to stop the use of 'n-i-g-g-e-r'. do you understand that allowing the censorship of certain words is just as un-american as allowing monopolies???

 

Technically, many free radio stations, if not most, have streaming music on their websites. For people who have, say, a wireless provider with an unlimited bandwith contract and a carPC, you can listen to that station, anywhere in the country, for free.

You, like a lot of people, keep arguing to finer details to call this a monopoly. Oh no, the company will be a monopoly in the satellite radio, commercial-free music but not the talk stations, that can be listened to at home or in the car, and have black hand held receivers, Mel Karmazin is going to be the CEO of only this company, and whatever other detail you want to throw in there to call it a monopoly.

Music distribution. When the FCC said Xirius could not be formed, downloading songs, the iPod, and "advanced civilization" was just in its infancy (with the exception of advanced civilization seeing as how we have new inventions EVERY year). What the FCC saw was free radio and subscribtion radio. It was not a crowded market like it is now with so many distribution options for music.

AND, just so everyone knows, XM and Sirius are not the ONLY satellite radio providers. Granted, they are the only ones in North America, but that means that if Xirius merges and tries to screw the consumers, another provider can sweep in and compete and get the business. Because XM and Sirius can barely exist together, how would a 3rd company be able to compete?

There is no reason this merger has to be bad for consumers. Xirius would have NO reason to raise the subscription. They do not make money because of subscriptions. They make money because of the advertisements on the non-music stations. If they can get a reasonable market share of radio listeners (yes, 14 million satellite radio vs. about 250 million free radio listeners) instead of dividing it in half with each other, bigger companies will spend more money for the advertisements. Just like free over-the-air TV, the money is made in commercials to provide the service for free.

Now, what seems more reasonable, let two civilization advancing companies go bankrupt and the consumer loses because of the hardware cost and possibly if they bought a lifetime subscription; or let two companies combine to have a whole 5% of the market share and either be successful and consumers are happy or try to screw the customer which will go to any of the many alternatives and thusly, sinking satellite radio and exercising the fact that we, as a people, let companies exist?

 

dgHotLava, you're making less and less sense with each post. I'd quit while you're ahead.

I see what you're saying about keeping up with the times, but that is an entirely different issue from that of free market competition. But how we got from that subject to the banning of hate speech really blows my mind. Nice job, super mod.

You will never be able to convince a reasonably logical person that satellite radio and terrestrial radio are not competing with each other.

You said it yourself....satellite radio is trying to attract listeners from free radio. That is practically the definition of competition!

 

boy do you have an abtuse view.
you can attract customers from anywhere...ipods, computer, free radio, tv, newspapers, librarys, books, games, cell phones, land lines, speach.
so, by your definition...Sat. radio is competeing with everything...


a definition of competition:
Where two businesses offer similar products or services, they are in competition with each other.

Sat radio is not similar in their product or service to free radio (or anything else for that matter.)
thats why NEW laws and regulations were written for them. if it was new...there was nothing else like it. if there is nothing else like it, it can't compete.

 

technically, yes.
real world, have you tried to get coast to coast coverage with a wireless provider?

there are a lot of black out areas, but i do like your thinking. creative.

reminds me of the 802.11x challenge. a group of college students were trying to map a national network of open wifi sites.



and i do admit we are splitting hairs about the regulations around the merger, but it is all good.
none of our banter here will change what happens. sooner or later some of us will be able to say 'i knew it' or 'it makes no sense'...

 

OT:
how is it hate speach?
they are just two words.
it is your american right to be able to use them.

and the comparison was about american nature relating to current events.
it is un-american to let monopolies develop.
it is un-american to censor speach.

yet we are letting others rip away our american rights by letting monopolies develop and letting people try to ban free speech.

 

I'm practically speechless! I mean, I don't even know how to respond to that. I can only hope this is joke and you're just tryin' to get my goat. To say that satellite radio is not similar to free radio in its product or service is officially the most asinine thing I've ever heard, hands down. Sure you can "attract" customers from anywhere... that's called ADVERTISING. Free market competition is when potential customers (and yes, even if you are getting a service for free, you ARE still a customer, but I'm sure we'll argue that one next) decide between two alternatives, either of which can meet the same essential want or need.

You wanna listen to some music? You can listen to the radio. It doesn't cost you anything, but the radio stations are making money off of you in the form of advertising revenue. Mickey D's is theoretically paying your 'radio bill'. Satellite radio has few or no commercials, so it's up to you to pony up the cash. Either way you are listening to the radio. But if the satellite radio companies are convincing enough, they can persuade to you pay them instead of listening to free radio. If you don't buy into their pitch, you'll listen to terrestrial radio instead. The more people who listen to HOT-101, the more they get to charge Ronald for his commercials.

Gawd! Do I have to explain EVERYTHING to you??

 

Lucky for you, nobody is trying to ban free spelling!

 

so..it's not like you never typed quick and didn't spell check...

what, no hate speech defense either???

 

now you understand the diff between attracting customers and competeing for customers...you are finally learning.

you need to understand the bigger picture of how sat vs. free radio work.
you seem to think you know how free radio works, so go learn how sat. works and come back with a good arguement.

everything you said just reinforces my view of how much different sat is from free...

enjoy your free service, i'm sure it is top notch...

 

yourself for being stupid.

 

don't be mad 'cause you don't have a clue.

 

Ohhhh...*now* I remember why I stopped posting here! It's because I got tired of trying to get through to retards. I should thank you for reminding me that crack baby syndrome is irreversible. I'm done here.

(Unsubcribing from thread.)