Discussion:
If the merger goes through ala Carte mayl take effect
(too old to reply)
Coyote
2007-03-21 01:01:30 UTC
Permalink
Mel Karmazin, CEO of SIRIUS Satellite Radio, announced today that parents
who are offended by programming such as Howard Stern will recieve a decrease
in programming costs after the XM-SIRIUS merger.

"There would be a cost reduction to their bill in a more a la carte way,"
said Karmazin. "If somebody doesn't want it, not only are they not getting
it, but they're not subsidizing it either."

This is great. I for one do not care for Stern, Playboy or talk channels.
I do like NFL, Nascar and NBA.

Music is my primary reason to subscribe to sate radio.
Kimba W. Lion
2007-03-21 12:43:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Coyote
"There would be a cost reduction to their bill in a more a la carte way,"
said Karmazin. "If somebody doesn't want it, not only are they not getting
it, but they're not subsidizing it either."
If you believe that, I've got a bridge I'd like to sell you. A merged
monopolistic company would have absolutely no reason whatsoever to reduce
prices.

Saw this in today's Washington Post:

"The satellite radio firms found an ally in the top Republican on the
subcommittee, Sen. Orrin G. Hatch of Utah. "I personally don't believe there
will be a lack of competition if you are successful," Hatch said."

Incredible.
Post by Coyote
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/20/AR2007032001474.html
YKW '06
2007-03-23 05:53:15 UTC
Permalink
On 21 Mar 2007, Kimba W. Lion <KimbaWLion> re-ordered random electrons
Post by Kimba W. Lion
Post by Coyote
"There would be a cost reduction to their bill in a more a la carte
way," said Karmazin. "If somebody doesn't want it, not only are they
not getting it, but they're not subsidizing it either."
If you believe that, I've got a bridge I'd like to sell you. A merged
monopolistic company would have absolutely no reason whatsoever to
reduce prices.
Other than to attract new subscribers...
Post by Kimba W. Lion
"The satellite radio firms found an ally in the top Republican on the
subcommittee, Sen. Orrin G. Hatch of Utah. "I personally don't believe
there will be a lack of competition if you are successful," Hatch
said."
Incredible.
After all, the ability of most North Americans to receive thirty stations
of "free" (yes, you have to pay for the receiver) OTA radio content and
the advent of portability of potentially every song, podcast and other
bit of audio content ever recorded from both commercial and non-
commercial sources via digital devices provides absolutely no competitive
pressures for satellite distributors.

"Incredible", indeed.
Post by Kimba W. Lion
Post by Coyote
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/20/AR2007
032001474.html
--
------------------- ------------------------------------------------
|| E-mail: ykw2006 ||"The mystery of government is not how Washington||
|| -at-gmail-dot-com ||works but how to make it stop." -- P.J. O'Rourke||
|| ----------- || ------------------------------------ ||
||Replace "-at-" with|| Keeping Usenet Trouble-Free ||
|| "@" to respond. || Since 1998 ||
------------------- ------------------------------------------------
unknown
2007-03-23 13:55:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by YKW '06
Post by Kimba W. Lion
If you believe that, I've got a bridge I'd like to sell you. A merged
monopolistic company would have absolutely no reason whatsoever to
reduce prices.
Other than to attract new subscribers...
Right. So you get temporary introductory rates that won't apply to existing
subscribers...
Post by YKW '06
After all, the ability of most North Americans to receive thirty stations
of "free" (yes, you have to pay for the receiver) OTA radio content and
the advent of portability of potentially every song, podcast and other
bit of audio content ever recorded from both commercial and non-
commercial sources via digital devices provides absolutely no competitive
pressures for satellite distributors.
If there was anything worthwhile on terrestrial radio, most people wouldn't
have bothered with pay satellite radio. "Consolidation" has ruined radio, so
now we should allow it for satellite radio?

And there are already plans in progress to take away the free status of
digital terrestrial broadcasts.

None of this is about benefiting listeners.
N***@gmail.com
2007-03-23 14:21:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by unknown
None of this is about benefiting listeners.
I seldom agree with you about anything but I believe you are
absolutely right about this.

Consumers are sure to be losers in this deal.
CodeMonkey
2007-03-23 14:26:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by N***@gmail.com
I seldom agree with you about anything but I believe you are
absolutely right about this.
Hell just froze over.
Kimba W. Lion
2007-03-23 20:56:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by CodeMonkey
Post by N***@gmail.com
I seldom agree with you about anything but I believe you are
absolutely right about this.
Hell just froze over.
Heh. I don't think you'll find anyone who's not on the XM or Sirius
payroll who seriously thinks a merger will be a good thing.
The only question is whether the government will allow it.
Jack Hamilton
2007-03-24 02:52:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kimba W. Lion
Post by CodeMonkey
Post by N***@gmail.com
I seldom agree with you about anything but I believe you are
absolutely right about this.
Hell just froze over.
Heh. I don't think you'll find anyone who's not on the XM or Sirius
payroll who seriously thinks a merger will be a good thing.
The only question is whether the government will allow it.
WHose payroll is the FCC on?
Airdale
2007-03-24 19:42:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by N***@gmail.com
Consumers are sure to be losers in this deal.
your iQ must be very high.........

--
see the forest no
L Alpert
2007-05-06 13:49:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by N***@gmail.com
Post by unknown
None of this is about benefiting listeners.
I seldom agree with you about anything but I believe you are
absolutely right about this.
Consumers are sure to be losers in this deal.
Especially if it is supported by republicans.
Pete
2007-05-07 12:46:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by L Alpert
Post by N***@gmail.com
Post by unknown
None of this is about benefiting listeners.
I seldom agree with you about anything but I believe you are
absolutely right about this.
Consumers are sure to be losers in this deal.
Especially if it is supported by republicans.
If its not supported by republicans how can it be good for Americans.
You know God fearing non union hard working People who think we live
in a good country worth fighting for and also think its time people
take responsibly for bad choices in life.
Kimba W. Lion
2007-05-08 15:06:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pete
Post by L Alpert
Post by N***@gmail.com
Consumers are sure to be losers in this deal.
Especially if it is supported by republicans.
If its not supported by republicans how can it be good for Americans.
You know God fearing non union hard working People who think we live
in a good country worth fighting for and also think its time people
take responsibly for bad choices in life.
That's the conservative philosophy, not what Republicans practice.

(And not what Democrats practice, either. There's not much useful difference
between the two major parties.)

Loading...