Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: threeleftsmakearight

Not at all, in fact it’s quite appropriate. The comment it was in response to an implication that all audio content was essentially equivalent, which it is not. Satellite radio has a number of technical advantages over terrestrial radio, as do cars over horses. They aren’t equal, thus only one satellite radio content provider is a monopoly.


47 posted on 04/08/2008 8:45:39 AM PDT by SpaceBar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies ]


To: SpaceBar

Almost by definition you can’t have a monopoly on a non-essential good.

Love it as much as I do, satrad is a luxury good.

If it went away, I would just switch to listening my iPod full time.

How is an iPod not a competitor to, or a substitute for, satrad?


49 posted on 04/08/2008 8:53:40 AM PDT by Loyolas Mattman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies ]

To: SpaceBar
They aren’t equal, thus only one satellite radio content provider is a monopoly.

So what if the merger is blocked and, say, XM goes out of business. Now Sirius is the only provider of Sat Radio, and thus by your definition a monopoly. So should the government step in and dismantle them?

57 posted on 04/08/2008 10:12:27 AM PDT by pepsi_junkie (Often wrong, but never in doubt!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson