Regarding nepotism and other aspects of the merger...
I see both companies spent well beyond their mean's... How and why?
By adding and signing a seemingly endless list of exclusive programming, that were, in many cases, deep in niche categories, in my opinion, were simply representations of irresponsible management and seemingly out of control extravagant expenditures... all in an attempt to out do one another.
There's responsible competition, and then there's just plain stupidity... both gambled...
Sirius, in resent quarters, has seen very healthy growth, juxtaposed to its previous underdog position, earlier in the game.
To be quite frank, I use XM primarily for BBC World. Then CNN, FoxNews, NPR, XMComedy, Classical, Jazz, Chill, Alternative, Bluegrass, and Disney (for my daughter). And that's pretty much it. I have eclectic tastes in music, news and information, and that's where both satellite radio providers excelled in my personal wants and needs. That doesn't mean the personality driven exclusives' don't have their place, but at what cost(s)? I believe, programming and production costs, got way out of hand.
When I'm in the car, for the most part, I'm in it for a minimum of an hour or longer... I use my iPod, as well, to supplement, which is also interfaced through the Prius' entire system, to listen to my personal musical choices, genres, and podcasts...
Personally, I hate commercials, and both companies, when launched, based their entire operations on the basis of commercial free services. The introduction of commercials, were in part, due in part, to a lack of profitability.
I had Sirius installed, when I had my Jeep Liberty (back then, the unit was fairly large, and resided under the driver's seat). When I purchased my Prius, back in December of '04, XM was the only service that was manufactured as a Toyota compatible receiver (a black-box), that would allow full operation functionality through the vehicle's steering wheel toggles, and touch LCD display.
My preference, as to musical programming leans towards Sirius, and I hope to see it them lead programming decisions...
As I see it... if both companies maintained reasonable productions, at reasonable costs, both could have been profitable, today. Looking back, they've both spent copious amounts of money towards costly, exclusive productions, featuring well known personalities, which I viewed as, enormously excessive in compensation, thus pulling both services into, and maintained in, non-profitability.
My position, and it's quite obvious, one must run a business responsibly, or you'll ultimately pay the price, through failure.
Again, let me reiterate... this decision, can and most likely, will have far a reaching impact on future merger proposals... as it clearly establishes and sets precedence.
Now, as to personnel redundancy... both companies have had to write off losses, while adding more and more costly programming. They still operate at a loss. How must they address this...? Anyone who thinks Sirius/XM will not significantly combine operational costs, reduce staff, and redundancies... as they will now be able to combine CSR operations, engineering, administration, programming, etc... is missing the meaning for the merger. Both of them must cut operational costs, dramatically, and that means their human assets will have to be drastically reduced in order to become profitable. People are going to lose their jobs... and again, it'll be tough to find a new position within the industry.
The Commission ordered both companies, in the past, to manufacture and promote receivers that were capable of receiving both services... they both baulked at the mandates, as they wanted to maintain reasonable exclusivity, when it came to vehicle receivers.
The sole purpose of this venture is to reduce costs by combining both entities... But, by maintaining a 'status quo' concerning operations, will simply defeat the cost effective objectives of combining both services.
Consider... why program and maintain 2 different classical, jazz, alternative, etc, etc, etc channels? Why have twice as many Program Directors, GMs, jocks, etc...
I believe, both have behaved irresponsibly, but it was part of their business model(s)... XM's case, it's quite obvious, they kept pushing the envelope, and very recently, were required to take out an additional securities offering to raise funds to subsidize operations, to continue service (some where shy of $700 million) in the last week.
Both could have eventually become profitable, on their own, if left to make decisions on their own merits, by downsizing certain aspects of their operations.
I've worked a good portion of my life in media (broadcast radio, television, as well as cable). I've been in management, a producer, and an on-air personality. And yes, the media business is one of constant turmoil, volatility, and turnover... it isn't one of the fields one looks to for job security, and I can say that from personal experience!
It is, in my opinion, a situation, if were left well enough alone, in the long run, both would have eventually wised up... shareholder's would eventually demanded more lean, responsible and cost effective operations... trim their excessive expenses and eventually become profitable... by taking the merger route, an anticompetitive one, from my perspective, leaves us with less choice, and basically removes the competitive aspect to the business.
I'll agree with those who have stated, there is still competition with terrestrial OTA stations, and if ever successful, HD Radio. Add iPods, etc... I see both Sirius and XM's primary service platform to be, in the automobile (bandwidth does not cater to the audiophile's taste's, as apparent in sampling rates that produce choking highs).
We're here, the decision has been made, and we'll now have to live with that decision, making the best of it.
Only time will tell as to just how beneficial this merger will be in the public's interest.
