SydLexia.com - The Forums :: View topic - Satellite Radio, Will it Survive the Depression?

Joined: Dec 06 2007 Location: Connecticut Posts: 11244

Satellite Radio was the promise of better quality, more choices, and a better interface.

However, the cost for such innovation was... well it was money.

Sirrius and XM launched independently, fought each other, and then bonded together. But they still aren't free, or even merged.

As things stand, Sattelite radio has been doing well, but not as well as it needs to in order to compete the way that cable competes versus broadcast.

As we stand on the brink of the second great depression, I believe that less people will see the need to pay for radio. As the number of subscribers dwindles, so will the amount of content, and thus the cycle will dwindle Pay Radio into nonexistence.

As if that weren't enough bad news for Satellite Radio, auto makers can't seem to sell their cars. As that trend continues, less and less people will get free trials for Satellite radio, and the number of units capable of playing the radio stations will begin to decrease per household.

What do you guys think?

Is Satellite Radio on its way out?

Can Howard Stern save it?

Posted: Dec 24 2008 06:54 pm

When my wife bought her last car, we had XM for a while. I really liked it because ESPN radio actually came in clear. It also had a great selection. It wasn't all that expensive, but at the time, we just had too many bills. To tell the truth, now days, we are only in the car long enough to go to work, the store, or wherever else we need to go to. It would be good for our trips back and forth from Kansas to Missouri. But aside from that, we wouldn't probably get a lot of good out of it. It would have served me much better when I was younger and liked to cruise around in my car.

It really is good, but aside from us, I never knew anybody else who had it. I don't know if its on its way out or not, but with the growing MP3 industry, it wouldn't surprise me. The economy would have an impact on it, but I don't know if it would make it anyways. Then again, there may be many more subscribers than I realize.

I remember in the mid-late 90's, we had DMX. I can't remember if it was satelite or cable, but it was pretty solid too.

Posted: Dec 24 2008 07:05 pm

Fuck the radio in general, I'm also still buying CD's so you can take your MP3 players and shove them as well. :damnwhippersnapperswiththeirnewfangleddoodadsgrumblegrumble:

Posted: Dec 24 2008 07:21 pm

I would say with the sports stations and the ability to stream XM while at work, I think it still will hold up. I think if it got to the point where they can't sell more units they would probably just start advertising on there stations. Yea they pride themselves on no advertisements, but I would rather have 100 channels to choose from then, like 3.

UsaSatsui's Youtube Channel · Posted: Dec 24 2008 09:48 pm

It'll survive, but I highly doubt it will in it's current form.

Radio nowadays is largely a medium for three things: Listening to music or sports while working or driving, getting news (particularly local news), and talk radio. Broadcast radio does all three of those things pretty well as it is, for free, and satellite doesn't offer a very clear advantage in any of those categories (in fact, it's far worse in the local news department). You can't look at it like Cable TV, where there's 100 channels and someone is gonna find SOMETHING to watch they can't find on broadcast. People don't listen to radio like they watch TV. And people tend to balk at paying 10 bucks a month for something they can get for free. Even for Kansas City Royals games in Florida and Howard Stern.

It's a great technology, though, and I can see it thriving, but I think they need to change the way they sell it. Instead of the monthly subscription thing, I'd probably charge a small yearly or lifetime subscription fee ($10 a year, or $50 for life, or something) and sell some limited advertising. Let's face it, radio ads don't irritate people THAT much, and they work. Offer an "ad-free upgrade" for the 10 people who it irritates or something.

Posted: Dec 25 2008 12:39 am

UsaSatsui wrote:

It'll survive, but I highly doubt it will in it's current form.

Radio nowadays is largely a medium for three things: Listening to music or sports while working or driving, getting news (particularly local news), and talk radio. Broadcast radio does all three of those things pretty well as it is, for free, and satellite doesn't offer a very clear advantage in any of those categories (in fact, it's far worse in the local news department). You can't look at it like Cable TV, where there's 100 channels and someone is gonna find SOMETHING to watch they can't find on broadcast. People don't listen to radio like they watch TV. And people tend to balk at paying 10 bucks a month for something they can get for free. Even for Kansas City Royals games in Florida and Howard Stern.

It's a great technology, though, and I can see it thriving, but I think they need to change the way they sell it. Instead of the monthly subscription thing, I'd probably charge a small yearly or lifetime subscription fee ($10 a year, or $50 for life, or something) and sell some limited advertising. Let's face it, radio ads don't irritate people THAT much, and they work. Offer an "ad-free upgrade" for the 10 people who it irritates or something.

How would an ad free upgrade work? You'd have to send out two seperate signals for each channel. I'm pretty sure I hate regular broadcast radio because they play the same 12 songs over and over again. I swear to god everytime I get into my car T.I. - Whatever you Like comes on. It's ridiculous, the only rock station we have is a mix station (70's-00's). I would get Sattelite but I really just listen to ESPN Radio all day anymore.

UsaSatsui's Youtube Channel · Posted: Dec 25 2008 10:35 am

Quote:

How would an ad free upgrade work? You'd have to send out two separate signals for each channel.

Well, I have faith in technology to find a way to make it happen. I'm the idea guy, let's leave it to the eggheads in R&D to figure it out.