Xm/Sirius Merger

switze22 · 12-15-2007, 10:08 PM

This merger is set to happen sometime between now and probably end of January, and now is a great time to get into either XM or Sirius.

Nsanepig11 · 12-15-2007, 10:21 PM

i cant help but see how that would not be a monopoly on satellite radio.

graysonp · 12-15-2007, 11:01 PM

I wish it would hurry up and happen. Not because I invested in it, but because I bought XM service expecting a merger and I thought I would have the NASCAR channel by now....

Although, my dad has had stock in XM since it came out, so we'll see what happens if they merge.

EDIT:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nsanepig11

i cant help but see how that would not be a monopoly on satellite radio.

I don't think it would be a monopoly because anyone can still move into the satellite radio business. A merger isn't going to affect movement in/out of the industry, and it might even kick up a competitor or two.

paintswappin13 · 12-16-2007, 01:09 AM

they also might not specify that heavily. it wouldn't be a monopoly on radio by any means, and they might not consider satellite radio to be its own distinct catagory..

rdm3000 · 12-16-2007, 01:24 AM

Old news, any possible large profit gains from this merger would have been obtained by picking up some shares before merger was announced.

oonothing · 12-16-2007, 03:39 AM

Since the sirius stock is around 3 dollars a share, how would the stocks join? Would there still be 2 stocks or 1?

t_mo · 12-16-2007, 11:07 AM

http://investor.sirius.com/ReleaseDe...leaseID=230306

Details of the merger.

A lot of the merger has been priced in already so there won't be to much money to be made. Since there was a lot of skeptics that it would get regulatory approval there is still a little volatility in the stocks.

**Simon** · 12-22-2007, 04:35 PM

Wasn't there a requirement that they couldn't merge?

saints17 · 12-22-2007, 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Simon

Wasn't there a requirement that they couldn't merge?

that wouldnt be a "requirement"

btw, they two companies are both poorly run and its a bad idea to purchase stock for a company which makes people pay monthly for radio when they can get it for free. Its a waste of money and somewhat risky in this fairly weak economy.

debo08080 · 12-22-2007, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nsanepig11

i cant help but see how that would not be a monopoly on satellite radio.

It isnt seen as a monopoly because of the relevant market. They are considering the relevant market "radio" as opposed to satellite radio, in which case they are in no way a monopoly.

Correct me if i'm wrong, but its similar to the xerox case in the past.

**Simon** · 12-22-2007, 08:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saints17

that wouldnt be a "requirement"

Quote:

Originally Posted by The dictionary

Requirement...

1. that which is required; a thing demanded or obligatory: One of the requirements of the job is accuracy.
2. an act or instance of requiring.
3. a need or necessity: to meet the requirements of daily life.

As I said, I believe one of the requirements in order for them to get their license was that they couldn't ever merge.

I.e. There had to be two providers of satellite radio so that there was never a monopoly.

ryland52586 · 12-23-2007, 09:06 PM

this isnt going to happen because Howard is on sirius and Opie and Anthony are on XM and Howard hates everyone who competes with him.

JasionoX666X · 12-23-2007, 10:54 PM

If they merged, wouldn't that make them a monopoly business?
Thats the question we had in my business class that we had to debate.

Im not asking this question now though, im simply stating the question that was asked in business lol

t_mo · 12-23-2007, 11:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ryland52586

this isnt going to happen because Howard is on sirius and Opie and Anthony are on XM and Howard hates everyone who competes with him.

Do you really think Howard Stern had any say in this whole deal? He didn't

Quote:

Originally Posted by JasionoX666X

If they merged, wouldn't that make them a monopoly business?
Thats the question we had in my business class that we had to debate.

Im not asking this question now though, im simply stating the question that was asked in business lol

It would not be a monopoly. The companies can barely survive as single entities, hopefully together they will be able to compete with terrestrial radio. I don't know why everyone thinks that satellite radio is something radically different. I can either listen to radio, with commercials for free. Or I can pay money so that there is no commercials. Just because its a different signal doesn't really matter. I am still getting sound coming out of my car speakers. If Direct TV and Dish Networks merged would that be a big deal?

Legumeofterror (Banned) · 12-24-2007, 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nsanepig11

i cant help but see how that would not be a monopoly on satellite radio.

i don't see how it would be a problem even if it was, nobody needs satellite radio, and if they raised the prices to a ridiculous level they would just lose all their customers. its not like a telephone company that people need to communicate and would be forced to pay out of necessity.

Big P · 12-24-2007, 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saints17

that wouldnt be a "requirement"

btw, they two companies are both poorly run and its a bad idea to purchase stock for a company which makes people pay monthly for radio when they can get it for free. Its a waste of money and somewhat risky in this fairly weak economy.

Odd, I would love to know what you base that whole statement on. With the market growing at a steady rate every month, I guess some people think its not a waste of money.

I found it strange that this has taken so long...oil companies merge faster then this and this is nothing compared to an oil company. Maybe there is fact in what Howard says about them hating him and people on regular radio spending missions to stop this meger because they fear sat radio.

graysonp · 12-24-2007, 04:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big P

Odd, I would love to know what you base that whole statement on. With the market growing at a steady rate every month, I guess some people think its not a waste of money.

I said that too until I got XM in my truck. Now I can't stand normal radio. It's worth every penny to not have to listen to 40 minutes of commercials/talk/contests/info every hour.

Big P · 12-24-2007, 04:37 PM

I got sirius about 2 years ago and have not listened to regular radio since.

ryland52586 · 12-24-2007, 09:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by t_mo

Do you really think Howard Stern had any say in this whole deal? He didn't

they payed howard more that the ****ing company was worth, i think he may have some say

berry_wendel · 12-24-2007, 09:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ryland52586

they payed howard more that the ****ing company was worth, i think he may have some say

Sirius is a public owned company. Which means the stockholders, the owners, dictate what happens. Now if Howard is a shareholder than he gets a say.

saints17 · 12-25-2007, 02:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big P

Odd, I would love to know what you base that whole statement on. With the market growing at a steady rate every month, I guess some people think its not a waste of money.

I base the statement on the fact that the dow is down about 500 points since july, the weakening dollar, depreciated property values, and a subprime credit crunch. Record numbers of foreclosed homes dont help the economy either.