XM + Sirius = Sirius Trouble? (insert cheesy laugh here)

Well for all of us satellite radio fans, the announcement yesterday by XM & Sirius of a proposed merger makes the heart go pitter patter. Will I now be able to get Howard Stern on XM? Martha Stewart? Can I finally get ALL the sports I want on one receiver? Whatever it is that makes you want to have both subscriptions, it now could become a reality....HOWEVER, before we get too excited, let me bring us all back down to earth for a moment:

A merger of this kind is extremely difficult. It compares in some ways with the now defunct attempt of EchoStar and DirecTV to merge.

The main reason that we may see some troubles? 3 Letters: F-C-C. The main issue is a 1997 FCC rule that expressly prohibits one company from owning both satellite licenses. I can only assume that this rule was put into play to keep anyone from monopolizing satellite radio (who could ever monopolize radio?) .

Although XM and Sirius are both understandably confident that the merger will be given the greenlight, for the merger to be approved, according to FCC Chairman Kevin J. Martin, "the companies would need to demonstrate that consumers would clearly be better off with both more choice and affordable prices." I have four words for them "Good Luck with That."

Another 3 Letter organization that is also raising serious issues about the merger is NAB. The National Association of Broadcasters describes itself on its website (at www.nab.org) as:

"a trade association that advocates on behalf of more than 8,300 free, local radio and television stations and also broadcast networks before Congress, the Federal Communications Commission and the Courts."

Read between the lines and you will see that this organization does some hefty lobbying, so they are certainly not to be ignored. And when it comes to an alternative that could make terreestrial radio much less enticing for consumers, the NAB will be a pitbull in the corner of not allowing this merger to see the light of day.

Lastly, before we all get lost in day dreams of "umpteen" channels under one subscription plan lets not forget that competition is good for the consumer and most of all the indie musician. Its a very easy parallel to draw to terrestrial radio as ClearChannel has gobbled up seemingly all of the bandwidth on the radio and controls it with an insatiably money hungry Iron First. Do you think if clear channel owned all of the college radio stations too that it would be good for indie musicians?

I'll let you insert your ClearChannel radio woes here, but I'll also pose a couple of questions from the consumer side:

- Do you think that satellite radio would be as affordable as it is right now if the two companies weren't hashing it out to grow their subscriber bases? (both companies are practically giving the receivers away right now to encourage subscriptions)
- Do you think the content choices would be as eclectic as they are right now?
- Do you think Howard Stern could have made $100 million any other way? (well I guess this one is harder to answer, but you get the point).

I'll give you my answer, which I expect to be the same as the FCC's answer to the proposed Sirius and XM merger:

NO