Charliemike
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2005
- Messages
- 390
- Reaction score
- 1
It's amazing how misunderstood this merger seems to be.
Lots of wailing and gnashing of teeth about monopolies.
Here's what I wrote in another forum. I thought I'd include it here because we're all civil and edumacated
This is not a monopoly. The barriers to market entry are artificial and not aggressive monopolistic action by the XM/Sirius entity.
The FCC only has two licenses for satellite radio. Obviously, if the FCC was worried about any kind of monopolistic activity by XM/Sirius they could simply issue another license and be done with it.
The argument is also spurious because of the misunderstood notion of competition. The market is broadcast radio. In this market there are several competitors to XM/Sirius including free terrestrial radio and HD radio. Satellite radio is a mechanism of transporting the widely-available medium not an entirely separate medium in and of itself.
This monopoly argument has been noted in several places today. As some have pointed out, this XM/Sirius merger is not unlike the DirecTV/Echostar merger that was quashed. At that time cable providers were lobbying very hard against the merger.
Once again, the argument was either misconstrued or misunderstood. Satellite TV is a means of delivery. Cable, power lines, and phone lines are all now possible options for delivery of the television medium.
If there are other alternatives to receiving the content, then I don't see how consolidation of one delivery provider is monopolistic ... I can get radio from other sources. I don't HAVE to have XM/Sirius in order to get radio.
In counties all around the country, there are restrictive franchise agreements in place with companies like Comcast that DO prevent new service providers from offering services. Comcast and others are state-sanctioned monopolies. Congress should be focusing on this and not XM/Sirius.
There is nothing wrong with a XM/Sirius merger in my humble opinion. It simply merges two promising companies that don't offer enough on their own to justify their subscription rates. As a merged entity, I would subscribe immediately.
Lots of wailing and gnashing of teeth about monopolies.
Here's what I wrote in another forum. I thought I'd include it here because we're all civil and edumacated
This is not a monopoly. The barriers to market entry are artificial and not aggressive monopolistic action by the XM/Sirius entity.
The FCC only has two licenses for satellite radio. Obviously, if the FCC was worried about any kind of monopolistic activity by XM/Sirius they could simply issue another license and be done with it.
The argument is also spurious because of the misunderstood notion of competition. The market is broadcast radio. In this market there are several competitors to XM/Sirius including free terrestrial radio and HD radio. Satellite radio is a mechanism of transporting the widely-available medium not an entirely separate medium in and of itself.
This monopoly argument has been noted in several places today. As some have pointed out, this XM/Sirius merger is not unlike the DirecTV/Echostar merger that was quashed. At that time cable providers were lobbying very hard against the merger.
Once again, the argument was either misconstrued or misunderstood. Satellite TV is a means of delivery. Cable, power lines, and phone lines are all now possible options for delivery of the television medium.
If there are other alternatives to receiving the content, then I don't see how consolidation of one delivery provider is monopolistic ... I can get radio from other sources. I don't HAVE to have XM/Sirius in order to get radio.
In counties all around the country, there are restrictive franchise agreements in place with companies like Comcast that DO prevent new service providers from offering services. Comcast and others are state-sanctioned monopolies. Congress should be focusing on this and not XM/Sirius.
There is nothing wrong with a XM/Sirius merger in my humble opinion. It simply merges two promising companies that don't offer enough on their own to justify their subscription rates. As a merged entity, I would subscribe immediately.