DBSTalk Forum banner
1 - 20 of 37 Posts

· Hall Of Fame
Joined
·
2,167 Posts
Orbitcast has an interesting point...

Interestingly, Adelstein may have hinted towards the direction that Commissioner Tate is leaning, when he released this statement today:

"...it appears they're going to get a monopoly with window dressing."

Adelstein seems to be speaking as if approval is inevitable.
Hmmm.....
 

· Hall Of Fame
Joined
·
2,167 Posts
"Tentative deal" made:
http://www.cnbc.com/id/25819198
The Federal Communications Commission is close to giving a green light to Sirius Satellite Radio's proposed takeover of acquisition of XM Satellite Radio, the Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday.

With two Democratic FCC commissioners opposed to the deal and two Republican commissioners in favor, the fifth vote from previously undecided Republican Deborah Taylor Tate appears set to go in favor of the merger, the newspaper said.

The vote could come as early as today. The two companies will pay about $20 million in fines in order to get the approval, the Journal said.
 

· Icon
Joined
·
846 Posts
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121683130281477651.html Subscription may be required, below is an excerpt of the article.

FCC Reaches Tentative Deal
To Approve XM-Sirius Merger

By AMY SCHATZ
July 23, 2008 4:14 p.m.

A tentative deal has been reached by a majority of commissioners at the Federal Communications Commission to approve the merger of Sirius Satellite Radio Inc. and XM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc., a FCC source close to the review said Wednesday.

Republican commissioner Deborah Taylor Tate is the only FCC member left to vote on the deal and she is expected to do so shortly, two FCC officials close to the negotiations said. She is expected to sign off on the deal in exchange for a consent decree that resolves several enforcement issues involving the satellite radio companies and a combined fine of about $20 million, an FCC source close to the deal said.

Ms. Tate has also asked for a variety of other minor conditions, an FCC source said. An adviser to Ms. Tate did not respond to a call for comment. Exact details about the deal are not known since FCC officials and lawyers for the companies appear to still be working them out.
 

· Hall Of Fame
Joined
·
4,351 Posts
FCC: "You're both losing money and want to merge to try to survive. In exchange for having followed all the rules, we're going to make you lose another $20M in order to get what you want - and we're going to call it a fine because 'blackmail' or 'extortion' or 'bribery' sounds so icky."
 

· Lifetime Achiever
Joined
·
21,244 Posts
My only thought about the fine is that they both were to produce receivers that could be used on both systems and did not. Perhaps there were a few other things they were supposed to do (or not do?)

Cheers,
Tom
 

· New Member
Joined
·
9 Posts
Tom Robertson said:
My only thought about the fine is that they both were to produce receivers that could be used on both systems and did not. Perhaps there were a few other things they were supposed to do (or not do?)

Cheers,
Tom
They would make their radios interoperable IF they were allowed to merge, not before. Why on earth would two competing companies make their equipment work together ?

No, the $20 M is ludicrous. This proceeding has allegedly taken this long to "protect consumers" and then they slap a huge fine on them that they will just pass along to their customers. BRILLIANT!!!
 

· AllStar
Joined
·
58 Posts
This whole saga makes me feel like my head could explode. The Justice department takes 13 months and says no monopoly. Then the FCC tries to put unprecedented moronic stipulations like giving up 25% of its bandwidth to competitors, forcing HDradio tuners into sat tuners, a 20 million dollar fine for doing nothing wrong(huh!), and a bunch of other anti-competitive stipulations. The NAB were clearly trying to delay this deal so that the sat companies would be dead or crippled if it ever did get approved. I hope the new company sues the crap out of the FCC and NAB for ant-competitive, hostile business practices, bribing elected officials, anything so that bureaucrats get there comeuppance.:mad:
 

· Beware the Attack Basset
Joined
·
26,475 Posts
deadrody said:
They would make their radios interoperable IF they were allowed to merge, not before.
Receiver interoperability is part of the conditions of a Digital Audio Radio Service (DARS) license and has been from the beginning. FCC rules state that each and every DARS operator must "certify that its satellite DARS system include a receiver that will permit end users to access all licensed satellite DARS systems that are operational or under construction."

When someone pressed the issue, Sirius and XM got together and on October 6, 2000, filed a joint submission with the FCC that they were working on a solution. I think that's pretty much where it died.

Now that the merger appears to be a done deal, the losers in the battle (Clear Channel et al) want their pound of flesh.
 

· Lifetime Achiever
Joined
·
21,244 Posts
deadrody said:
They would make their radios interoperable IF they were allowed to merge, not before. Why on earth would two competing companies make their equipment work together ?

No, the $20 M is ludicrous. This proceeding has allegedly taken this long to "protect consumers" and then they slap a huge fine on them that they will just pass along to their customers. BRILLIANT!!!
As harsh said, they would because they were required to by law.

Perhaps some of why they both are on hard times is general consumer electronics manufacturers couldn't make standard AV equipment and car radios that supported both.

Harsh, thanks for the details. I knew they were required, but not the specifics.

Cheers,
Tom
 

· Lifetime Achiever
Joined
·
21,244 Posts
harsh said:
Make no mistake: this is politics at its peak of ripeness.
Yeah, I have to close this thread as it so riddled with politics... (J/K) :)

Actually, you all have done a great job steering clear of the politics aspects. Thanks! That helps us moderators.

Cheers,
Tom
 

· Beware the Attack Basset
Joined
·
26,475 Posts
syphix said:
Doesn't that seem a bit excessive??
Depends on how you feel about someone lying on their application for a license to "serve the public good".

Interoperability seems like an awfully good idea that benefits the consumer and keeps the provider on their toes as far as remaining competitive.
 
1 - 20 of 37 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top