"XM/Sirius: The deal is going to be approved"

Says Radio Business Report:

Most broadcasters believe there are huge differences in the two
businesses [radio and satellite]. A local broadcaster does not have
over 100 channels at its disposal, and the satellite services need not
pay any attention whatsoever to local idiosyncrasies, much less deal
with local emergencies. Although both companies are still losing
money, both say they can and will survive on their own if the merger
does not go through. We'd strongly argue that the services are unique,
and since their continued survival as competitors is not an issue
there is no reason to grant a government-sanctioned monopoly.
It's true that survival alone is no reason to grant a merger, but
otherwise this argument is quite wrong.

The point of reference to satellite is not radio but "all alternatives
to satellite," including radio and all other technology. The
competitors to both satellite and radio are "things which provide the
same benefit as satellite and radio." Lobbying and power politics
aside, the issue has nothing - nothing - to do with how many channels
you have. This is an old school understanding of a new media world.

We in radio would be wise to cease our obsession with satellite and
focus on threats and opportunities which are immeasurably more
important to our future (and theirs, too).

The Feds will not see things the way RBR does.

The merger is going to get approved.

And it won't affect your world at all.

http://www.hear2.com/2007/11/xmsiriu....html#comments

Ha! Ha! **** in-dash HD Radio!