What could happen with the XM/Sirius merger?

[smockers83]

this discussion pretty much started in the g35 forum (Installing XM in an 07)...someone asked if they could put xm in their car and i said personally i would wait until news of what happens to the merger. i figured this would be a better spot to hold this conversation.

having the whole market or customers of one company would be a huge blow to the industry. but there's a big but here. and for the satellites, its just a matter of beaming up updated software to them. currently they say you'll be able to use your current hardware after (if) the merger. here comes the BUT. since the companies use different technologies, their boxes can only decode what they're made to decode--sirius or xm. i don't know what goes into the process of this but it seems to me that a change in the code would require a change in the decoder. what i think will happen after the merger is that they'll merge the programming and broadcast using both technologies and combine the spectrums that they use (they have rights to different parts of the spectrum). to hopefully illustrate this difference in technologies in my line of logic, if you want navtraffic with your xm, you need to have a decoder capable of decoding that technology (pioneer's xm navtraffic $199), not just a regular xm receiver (pioneer's $99). to keep producing 2 technologies for one service (combined xm/sirius) doesn't make sense for a business, so there's going to be an update coming, whether its a complete revamp or switching to one technology. that means someone or everyone has to update their equipment in some way. this happened not to long ago actually when microsoft stopped supporting Windows 98 when XP came out. 98 users either had to go on without further support or upgrade to XP. and new programs are made more and more for 2000/XP/Vista only, rendering 98 useless and that forces people to move to XP/Vista. microsoft has a virtual monopoly, so they can do this. xm/sirius will have an outright monopoly and they will do the same. if they can change the code so that nobody has to update their equipment, spectacular for us and them--we get to use our old stuff and they can switch to producing one technology. if not, then upgrades to our equipment may be called for. personally i think they'll switch to one technology, XM because they have the larger subscriber base. and those with sirius equipment will probably get deep discounts/rebates (if not for free) with their p.o.p and sending in their equipment. of course this is all hypothetical and won't happen for a few years. and chances at the merger are placed at less than 50%.

that's just my thinking. if someone else knows more about what's going on or the process of all this, input would be awesome because i'm waiting to see what happens because i want XM in my car, too.

[Defiant]

Here's my resistance to pay radio: I won't shell out $100, $200, or even $50 for a box that's going to cost me a monthly fee to use. Give away the players and charge for the content, duh. However, I no longer have enough of a commute to make pay-per-noise of value to me. A pal spends most of his time on the road with Sirius, and loves it; another has XM, and is also very happy. As for the merger, just send the same content over both systems, and grind and force the programming to fit. The system needs market penetration, which it was unable to attain in either XM or Sirius guise- numbers I'd been hearing were in fractional percentile figures in the major markets. Regular, free terrestrial radio doesn't have enough shortcomings for most customers to put much effort nor expense into satellite broadcast. Of course, those who can use satellite radio -long-distance travellers who have a favorite personality, or those on the fringe of radio coverage areas- should be a strong base, but so far it just hasn't caught-on very well.

[smockers83]

i wasn't asking for your opinion of pay-for radio and i had already mentioned the fact that they will have to broadcast over the 2 systems, unless you know that's what they will be doing long term. anything that you want to use to personalize your listening experience in your car is going to cost you whether its an iPod, xm/sirius, an HD radio, downloading music from itunes/rhapsody/etc and burning it to cds. it all costs something.

when pay-for tv, ie cable, (there was a day when tv was free) was started it took nearly 10 years to acquire 850,000 customers by 1962 (0.4% of the US population in 1962). compared to the 12 million (4% of the estimated 2006 US population) satellite radio has garnered since the FCC awarded XM's license in 1997--pay-for radio is taking off a lot faster than pay-for tv did. the penetration is there, its just that people who study the market to value the stocks have very high expectations that growth will keep growing at higher and higher rates. this won't happen for awhile until the whole population catches on and decides to start looking at satellite radio.

[Defiant]

True that there's costs. However, the start-up costs in getting CDs into MP3 format, CDs (or, chip memory as my $80 radio uses) is done for less than the cost of a satellite radio. I will not use a music subscription service at this point, as my ethics aren't bothered by stealing music that I've already paid for on vinyl, several times on the lousy cassettes they were put on, and CD.As for cable TV, when the idea was broached in the early sixties, the big selling point was that it would be commercial-free --an idea that has been completely forgotten on most channels: besides paying for cable access, we now pay for commercials advertising the very service we're already paying for. It will be interesting to see what the next generations will be willing to pay for, and at what levels. Wherever it all shakes out, we're in store for some really cool toys. It will be interesting to see how much the iPhone and its inevitable followers may affect the world.

[PoorManQ45]

Here's my resistance to pay radio: I won't shell out $100, $200, or even $50 for a box that's going to cost me a monthly fee to use. Give away the players and charge for the content, duh.

Gilette FTW!!!

I can tell you that the two systems are NOT compatible!

They operate on different frequencies and different sub-carriers of those frequencies.

It's like trying to use a japanese radio in the USA. The frequencies just arn't the same

Another comparison is trying to use a satellite box on a cable signal. It doesn't work.

What will need to happen is they either leave the content seperate and offer universal players(but still allow exist tuners to receiver their respective service), or they merge the content and offer a new player.
Modified by PoorManQ45 at 10:47 AM 3/26/2007

[EW]

They can make as many channels as they want on each service. It would not be difficult to broadcast the content of XM on Sirius and vice versa. Mel Karmazen(sp) said on Stern that they wanted to offer everything to everybody (like Dish and DirecTV). I don't know exactly what that means but I'm not worried about it.

[joe603]

I don't think that anything will change. Most people don't know about the merger, and thats what the company wants. It's doubtful that they will make a device that will use both feeds (XM and Sirius). Even if they did, surely you would have to pay "both companies" to use both services.

We'll see...just my .02