Promises, Promises

I'm not sure quite what to think about the proposed XM-Sirius merger, but as an XM customer I do want things go smoothly if there the merger does happen. I already have 2 XM radios (including one built in to a fairly expensive piece of stereo equipment), and I'm not looking to replace those any time soon.

So, in an effort to put the minds of customers like me at ease, XM sent out a letter a few days ago that said:

Rest assured that any radios or other equipment that you currently use will be fully supported, both before and after we create the new company. In fact, following the merger, we expect that existing radios will be able to receive a mix of programming from both services. There will be no obligation to buy a new radio. And, as always, we will honor all existing multi-year subscription plans.

Now, there is some artful language here, such as using "we expect" instead of "we will". And of course customers aren't obligated to buy new equipment, but that just means they can't legally compel me, not that I won't have to if I still want to get the signal I'm paying for. But this clever word play wasn't clear enough for the lawyers, apparently, who have more delineated notions of what constitutes a promise. So note the fine print (the very small and hard-to-read fine print) on the back:

The following factors, among others, could cause actual results to differ materially from the anticipated results or other expectations expressed in the forward-looking statement: general business and economic conditions; the performance of financial markets and interest rates; the ability to obtain governmental approvals on a timely basis; the failure of Sirius and XM shareholders to approve the transaction; the failure to realize synergies and cost-savings from the transaction or delay in realization thereof; the businesses of Sirius and XM may not be combined successfully…

Etc. etc. I know it's just boilerplate, but the fact is that XM is giving themselves about a dozen ways out of their pledges, including such handy catch-all excuses like "operating costs", which they can use if they have to spend any money at all to make their stuff work. The combination of false promises on the front taken back by the legalese on the back doesn't leave me very optimistic. Better if they hadn't said anything at all.