I disagree. While you and other people might wrap multiple facets of their lives in technology, the average citizen only listens to the radio during their round-trips for work 5 days a week. Until they can find a way to better compete with FREE, the service will be relegated to those with disposable income who have room in their budgets for luxury purchases. Howard Stern and commercial-free music is hardly a reason to pay 180.00 a year for background noise while you are busy concentrating on not hitting the Mexican Nationals running across 6 lanes of freeway.

I have this odd sensation that this could be applied to TechCrunch’s darlings Twitter, another company that has a revenue stream of $0 and keeps spending more each time a new twatter joins.

The company almost went bankrupt. Where does that figure into your analysis?

So what? If the government wants to destroy a business, that is a valid reason for investors to avoid that business. Likewise, if Merck has a promising treatment for cancer, but the FDA won’t allow it to be sold, then that is a valid reason to downgrade one’s estimate of Merck’s future potential. Likewise, if someone would like to start a business selling cocaine, but cocaine happens to be illegal, then you would be a fool not to consider the legal environment that the new venture would face.

I think it’s legitimate to criticize stupid government regulations. But you shouldn’t let your criticism of the regulations effect how you judge companies that are under the control of those regulations.

“If you do not want to pay less than $1 a day for the content, then go about your business. But, over 20 million people are paying for this and enjoying this service. …The FCC almost destroyed this company, to say Mel did this to save his job shows how ignorant you are to the facts.”

Wouldn’t it be reasonable to say that you’ve destroyed Sirius by paying less than a $1 a day for the content that you enjoy? Or rather, Mel Karmazin has destroyed this business by allowing you to pay less than $1 a day for the content that you enjoy? You realize that this company was facing bankruptcy right? You seem to be in denial of the basic facts of the situation.

Welcome to TC.

In fact, that was the biggest failing of XM – if they signed Stern, they could have wiped Sirius out early on and thus avoid the costs of the exclusive content each side has paid for.

Sarah, have you ever tried satellite radio? Sirius is as much a content company, as they are a delivery medium.

Keep up the good work Sarah

…”and Liberty will get 40% of the satellite radio company”

This should have said 100% ownership. John Malone is very smart. Just like when Malone took C. Michael Armstrong and AT&T to the cleaners.
What surprises me is that none of Mel’s fellow tribesman came to the rescue.

Sure, it’s weird that oil and telecommunications companies can get regulatory approval to merge in like two weeks, but our government officials are duty-bound to ensure that all due diligence is applied to something so powerful as a single satellite radio provider.