Filed under: Aftermarket, I.C.E., Tech
More details on XM / Sirius merger revealed
There are a lot of questions surrounding the proposed merger of competing satellite radio providers XM and Sirius. USA Today had a chance to ask a few to Sirius CEO Mel Karmazin, the would-be CEO of the two companies if the merger is allowed to take place. Below are some bullet points from the interview with answers to the most burning questions.- Fees would not likely be raised above $12.95/month
- Dual receiver radios will likely be available that can receive both XM and Sirius content
- People with radios that receive only one service can continue to receive just that service
- Both brands and services will remain intact
- Live, real-time satellite television will be offered
[Source: USA Today via Kicking Tires]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Tom Walker 6:24PM (2/27/2007)
The hardware is my biggest concern too. My Mazda6 has a really nicely integrated factory Sirius system, and I am not liking the idea of having to stick some tacky XM box on my dash to get the content I want. I'm not so worried about the price since as a Sirius subscriber I was already paying the higher of the two rates. On an annual basis it's really not bad.
Oh, and they had darn well better keep my Sirius music stations commercial free!!!!!!
Reply
Sean Mintz 8:04PM (2/27/2007)
They cannot easily merge the two stations in to one. It was my impression that the quality has already degraded by adding increasing numbers of stations.
I think the real question is whether or not they will be shelling out to replace single service tuners to dual capable receivers.
Sean
Reply
James Sonne 9:12PM (2/27/2007)
I definitely do not want one CEO running the only two satellite radio companies in existence. They'll be able to charge whatever they want. This is the epitome of a monopoly, and there's no way the federal trade commission will allow this merger to go through. I also like not having to support a company that supports a particular talk show clown.
Reply
John 9:21PM (2/27/2007)
I don't understand why they can't poll both Sirius and XM subscribers to find out what their favorite channels are. Drop the least popular channels (of each genre) from each service's line-up and then broadcast the same content over both Sirius and XM networks (so that those with either receiver will be hearing the same thing).
Then you don't have issues with choosing XM content or Sirius content or both. Each company can put less time and money into the programming and the customer doesn't have to purchase new hardware.
Wise up Sat. Radio.
Reply
BartMack 9:34PM (2/27/2007)
I've had both simultaneously, and decided I clearly prefer Sirius. This sounds like a golden opportunity for me to pay more and get less, probably why they like the merger idea so much.
Reply
Crutnacker 10:47PM (2/27/2007)
Frankly, I'm glad. We just bought a CR-V with XM built in and are Sirius subscribers. I think they should combine both into one, keep all the sports and news from both and then maybe offer dual content at some point in the future with the two systems merged into one radio.
Reply
phil 12:05AM (2/28/2007)
I hope they don't add more stations, as their bandwidth is seriously overtaxed as it is. Too many stations nobody listens to, and not enough bandwidth to make the only one that you like sound decent. Decrease channels, increase bitrate.
Reply
Richard 12:10AM (2/28/2007)
Tom Walker wrote (No. 1) "he hardware is my biggest concern too. My Mazda6 has a really nicely integrated factory Sirius system, and I am not liking the idea of having to stick some tacky XM box on my dash to get the content I want."
Clearly what is going to happen is that Sirius audio streams will be added to XM's current offerings and vice-versa. For example, Sirius subscribers will be able to hear Major League Baseball and Oprah. XM subscribers will be able to hear Howard Stern and NFL football games.
Reply
Brian 1:24AM (2/28/2007)
I've been an XM subscriber for over a year now and have enjoyed XM since. I've also subscribed to Sirius before moving to XM since they have much deeper playlists than Sirius. I just hope XMs massive playlist and channels stay the same. I was annoyed at Siriu's music channels, they would often repeat the same garbage over and over like it's free radio. I just hope the merged company doesn't dilute my XM playlists with Sirius crap music channels.
Reply
Justin 8:17AM (2/28/2007)
I don't like them messing with my commute entertainment...
Reply
Gary 8:36AM (2/28/2007)
I don't think the monopoly argument applies in this instance. It there were multiple other satellite stations and this would force them out of business then it might apply. But this is a case of having one satellite radio company survive rather than having two fail. If there were no satellite companies and one was starting up, they wouldn't tell them they could not do it because it would be a monopoly. The merger should be quickly approved.
Reply
DuckFat 10:13AM (2/28/2007)
This isn't going to go through because the basis of their argument is that platforms are the competition (satrad vs. ipod vs. HD Radio vs. AM/FM). It's bogus because if the FCC accepts that then they would have no legal way to stop Clear Channel from buying up ALL the radio stations or having only one satellite TV provider or one national cable company.
If it would happen though, they'd surely combine all the music stations and eliminate duplication. The news and talk stations could be combined to some degree. There are only a handful of channels with truly unique content (Stern, O&A, Oprah, etc.) It's absolutely feasible to put the same lineup on both networks.
I have XM and sure I'd like to have the Sirius content added for the same price. But they absolutely would not keep the price down and they'd probably try the ala carte crap again to make you pay for the "premium" channels. It'll be a bad thing if this gets approved.
Reply
Dave 12:14PM (2/28/2007)
Can you say 8-track? Sat radio will disappear, mostly because these companies have horrible financials and will ruin their product by allowing commercials to slowly take over their channels. They can't help it since it is the only revenue stream that could save them. But, once their channels are rife with advertising, why would anyone want to pay a subscription fee? They won't. Nor will they want to pay for the hardware to accept the content since cars will have all sorts of other interesting audio options available like HD radio.
Bye bye, XM and Sirius.
Reply
Nick 6:21PM (2/28/2007)
I see most of these comments as shortsighted. There is clearly a strong financial case to be made for merging these two nacent companies, and there is a strong case for the consumer as well. Increasing prices will not be a benefit for these two companies, as it would slow adoption and retention. The two companies can generate more money (1+1=3) in terms of audience share in the advertising markets as a combined entity.
Overall, as a subscriber to both services, I welcome the idea of the merger. Sat Radio will evolve like any other new medium, and should be permitted to do so.
A much bigger issue here is to watch as the "Content Police" try to squeeze XM and Sirius on their uncensored content. They may not do it overtly, but it will happen. These are the same lobbys that want to tell you what their version of free speech is. There is surely to be a lot of that going on in the cloakrooms on the Hill.
At the end of the day, its just radio, and its a choice. No one is forced to buy it, or listen to it.
I'm sure all the consumers that subscribe to both services would like to see this medium prosper, and I believe that a merger would allow that to happen faster, which will be better for consumers.
There is a reason why 13 Million people have left regular radio for sattelite. Its the content, stupid!
They (regular radio) are now arguing for more regulation from the Justice department and the FCC, when it has been regulation that has caused commercial radio content to become homogonized and boring.
Its also quite clear that Madison Avenue has to look at people who are willingn to pay for specific content as more valuable demographically than people that wont or dont pay for content.
Mel Karmazin has a track record of doing the right thing for listeners and shareholders alike as a radio broadcast executive, I'd give the guy some lee-way on this deal.
Reply
ronin 6:56PM (2/28/2007)
Wait a minute. The fee won't go above 12.95 a month and there will be new receivers that can detect both signals.
So if I have an old radio that only gets XM I pay 12.95, or only Sirius, I pay 12.95, or if I have a new radio I get both and pay only 12.95?
Tell you what, if I bought a radio in good faith that only gets one signal, and didn't change a thing on my side, why shouldn't I pay half that 12.95?
Reply
Bob 6:24PM (3/01/2007)
I think it would be better. Now if you want NFL you have to have Sirius, if you want MLB you have to have XM, and one had indy racing and one nascar.
Now each company owns most of the stations, that woul d be like buying tv from ABC or NBC but you cant get both.
They are saying costs should go down, so make a deal with them, in order to get it approved, prices must go down at least 25% as soon as the deal is done and price increases would be limited to 5% a year after that for 5 years. 5 Years should be enough time for a new company to get started to compete with the newly merged one.
Reply