> In today's news we see the DOJ declaring that merging the only two > satellite broadcasters into one would not be anticompetitive. I guess > their logic is that a duopoly has been so anticompetitive that a > monopoly > could not be much worse? > > Yet one more example of why the USA is so far behind technologically.
I see you're using National Association of Broadcasters logic: they don't compete against us, which is why we lobbied so viciously to prevent the merger. You must have forgotten why there were only 2 satellite providers to begin with: NAB lobbying to restrict the number of companies. Which, BTW, is the only way the NAB knows how to compete: have the state crush or hobble the competition. I'd say the boards and shareholders of XM and Sirius know a bit more about their business than you or the guvmint does. As someone who has both services, I can get behind this if it means that there will continue to be an alternative to the god-awful, bland drivel that Clear Channel, et al. pump out in near infinite volume. ************************************************************************* ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *************************************************************************
