Netflix & Paramount fight to acquire Warner Bros.
 

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce91x2jm5pjo

So, thoughts on this?

I personally am not a fan of monopolies. And I don't subscribe to Netflix neither do I plan on ever doing so.

If I'm wrong then I'm wrong but I think this will be pretty grueling, it will take a year or two and ultimately Netflix will have to walk away and it will all be a very costly affair.

Deals/acquisitions like these can be pretty grueling even when nobody really has a problem with them, let alone something like THIS one... where everyone and their mom is against it. Government, guilds, talent alike.

I can't decide what's more depressing, this, Disney buying FOX a few years back or the alternate scenario of Paramount buying WB instead...

I remember when several years ago there was a discussion here of the possibility of WB being acquired by Disney and thus centralising Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck, etc. and The Looney Tunes characters. It sounded like a terrible hypothetical for me.

And honestly, aren't most Netflix productions flops? How do they even make money beyond people who subscribe to their stuff? Disney and WB profited a lot for lots of other stuff like merchandise, video games, movie ticket sales, etc...

They are, almost universally beyond a lot of disposable teenage rom-com stuff (stuff like The Kissing Booth movies, To All The Boys I've Loved Before, etc.). The thing is, they soak in such gigantically huge revenue from pure subscriptions of people just watching stuff like Breaking Bad re-runs that it doesn't matter.

In fact, Netflix (and a lot of streamers) are running kind of a gym membership scam. In a way. The best thing they can have is a bunch of people paying for monthly subscriptions who hardly ever watch anything.... but people that are happy to know that IF they did want to watch something, they COULD. This way Netflix just absorbs millions of people's subscription fees and don't have to worry about royalties or anything.

Here's why Warner Bros. Discovery went with Netflix.

https://variety.com/2025/film/column...et-1236601872/

The overreaction over this all over the internet is very stupid. No netflix is not going to cancel James Gunn's movie universe which has 2 movies already filming and the first Superman was a success. Literally the reason netflix purchased WB in the first place was to get the money these movies will make in the box office and then on streaming.

Also, no, netflix is not canceling DC comics, they're not going to stop WB from making videogames (remember they own Mortal Kombat now, as well as Batman Arkham games and any other DC videogames from this point onward), and so forth. And yes HBO shows are now part of netflix.

This also means the upcoming Harry Potter TV show will now be a huge part of netflix, probably another reason they were so interested because Harry Potter is still huge.

James Gunn and the CEO of Waner Bros. Discovery say the DCU films will continue to be shown on the big screen should the purchase by Netflix be completed.

https://comicbook.com/movies/news/ja...flix-purchase/

Paramount just launched a hostile takeover offer of $108.4 billion to buy Warner Bros. Discovery compared to Netflix's bid.

https://deadline.com/2025/12/paramou...ry-1236641640/

What is hostile about that?

It means it's not what the CEO or board necessarily wants to do, but since it's a publicly traded company someone can buy enough shares to force the board to do something different than what leadership wanted, hence hostile. It's usually not a great tactic for various reasons including morale, costs, etc.

What's funny about this is if they win but acquired so much debt to buy WB in order for the hostile take over then in 3 years we'll see Paramount for sale since it can't make a profit and then Netflix will take it all including paramount :lol:

How is that a hostile takeover?

I mean I didn't invent the term, they obviously don't find it friendly to go against what management wanted :lol: argue about it on wikipedia or call it corporate raid :lol:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_raid

That's not what I'm sayin' - I know what an academic "hostile takeover" is. I'm saying how does that apply here? I haven't read the article yet but I find it unlikely that Paramount went against leadership for an acquisition like this.....

I haven't read it either, but I mean if leadership/management chose Netflix as the winner of the bid it's safe to assume paramount plans to buy stock to force the acquisition against their will. But who knows, maybe something different is happening and the journalist is just plain retarded and doesn't know what a hostile takeover is and just made a clickbait heading.

From what I gather, it's like this:

* WB : "OK, everybody has until midnight on X date to send their bids in!"

* Netflix : (sends in its bid before midnight on X date)

* Paramount : (sends in its bid before midnight on X date)

* WB : After midnight on X date: "OK, Netflix's bid was higher!"

* The Media : "Netflix has WON WB!"

* Paramount : "Well hang on, we can counter-offer."

* WB : "OK, cool! We never said we wouldn't entertain subsequent offers."

* The Media : "NETFLIX HAS WOOOON WB!!!"

* Paramount : "In fact, here's our counter-offer."

* WB : "Thanks! We'll look at it."

* The Media : "NETFLIX HAS WOOOOOONNNN WB!!!!!"

No, that's not how things go. They go through a structured process, it's not ebay that whoever bids more wins. I'm sure management retention, warranties and break up fees all are big parts of the decision, it's not just about who will give more for shares, which Netflix has the bigger bank account btw so it's no match. They also choose whoever they think the board, who is elected by shareholders, will vote yes for. So yes, Netflix didn't just tweet out "We bought WB" thinking they wouldn't get it, it's pretty much a done deal unless regulatory bodies stop it.

I find a hostile takeover unlikely to happen, but if paramount wanted they could just buy enough shares to get rid of the board members that don't want to vote for them and put people in the board that would vote for them. In simpler terms, what happens in Spiderman 1

https://ih1.redbubble.net/image.3080...ca443f4786.jpg

Paramount promises to release 30+ films in theaters if the acquire Warner Bros. Discovery.

https://deadline.com/2025/12/paramou...es-1236641998/

Warner Bros. Discovery says it carefully look over Paramount's offer and will make a decision within 10 business days.

https://variety.com/2025/tv/news/war...id-1236603529/

Yeah they have to....
These buyouts have to survive scrutiny so they are done much like RFP's for government. Every proposal has to be reviewed and balanced against the value proposition - not just "price".

Ironic of course because commonly the lowest bidder wins, which leaves everyone to wonder how much of the review process is purely for the optics of it.

But ultimately they have to deeply review the entire offer.

Netflix's CEO is once again trying to assure that his company won't make the theater industry collapse if it purchases Warner Bros. Discovery.

https://deadline.com/2025/12/netflix...ow-1236642421/

I'm pretty indifferent to this whole thing. Same with Disney/Fox. I think people are overreacting. I was told on Blu Ray.com I'm wrong, mergers are doom for the company that's bought and it's the end of WB physical media.

Be that as it may, I hate how every Youtuber has to chime in with a 15min or longer video (ad revenue). All you see are those stupid thumbnails with "shocked" or "disappointed" faces and the WB logo being destroyed in someway :roll:

It'd be one thing if it was in cases like this...they do it for everything. Daily clickbait for very video game, movie and TV subject. Honestly I watched some from the few I actually follow (who aren't as clickbait-y) but they were just saying it was the worst deal ever too. So whatever.

Only thing I really thought about was Batgirl and SCOOB 2. Haha. Someone asked about Batgirl but it still needed significant work. I guess it was a tax write off. However SCOOB was to be completed. The producer said they would finish it for the sake of seeing it through. Can't find anything saying it was a tax write off or if that even matters after they merge.

Absolutely agree....
The Puritan-Generation must be bored to be making such a big deal out of this.

The next thing will be a deluge of YouTube videos about the topic titled "This Changes EVERYTHING!", and the Tubers will think that they are brilliant for it.

All the people that are against it area also the people that were pro Disney-Fox, and the only reason they wanted that deal was so they could have X-Men in the MCU, which didn't even matter since the MCU died and now we have one less studio.

I'd rather have Paramount have WB but at the same time, it's not like they have a great strategy either and someone who can actually absorb the debt ends up owning Paramount+WB. So yeah in a few years if the Netflix deal doesn't go through you'll see ParamountWB for sale and either the Saudi's will own it completely, or Netflix or Apple.

The save physical media and theaters arguments are laughable at best, physical media is already dead and just a niche at this point. Theaters are dying and will continue to die. I think in 10 years by 2035 they'll only be a niche relic that people will go to from time to time like they do other live type of events.

I do love physical media and collecting games/movies/shows.

I speculated Netflix might release more physical stuff now that WB will be part of them. People told me I was dumb to think that they'll even allow WB to continue physical releases. I think they'll keep doing it though.

What bothers me about Youtubers, that ones that constantly post...1. they're doing it for the ads and 2. it's all just thoughts and opinions. Which is fine but they frame videos as though they have some insider info. Either that or they just want to drum up a debate.

Anything along the lines "We need to talk about", "The REAL reason...", "listen to this before" and ya "This will change everything" I automatically ignore. I always take notice of the run time too.

Sorry but these channels should be demonetized. John Campea made a video about this very thing not long ago. Even saying he's guilty of doing it once in awhile but always tries not to.

netflix is owned in part by the obama's, IIRC. if netflix gets it, expect nothing to change at DC.

however, at least Paramount has a chance at turning it around, being an unknown entity.

latest news is, hostile take over happening now.

Puritan is not a word that fits the people you're describing. Puritanism has nothing to do with being left-wing or anything. On the contrary. Puritanism is a conservative thing and something I'd associate with right-wing Americans who profess certain branches of Protestantism.

Unfortunately youtube's algorithm rewards clickbaity video titles and thumbnails, which is why every decent sized youtuber uses them nowadays. The root of the problem is youtube itself and most content makers are just playing the game.

Wait it is? Newsflash for me.

Does it reward it though? Everything in my algorithm reflects stuff I recently/consistently watch, which is half general videos not clickbait-y ones.

One user, who I never subscribed to but occasionally watch completely dropped out of my algorithm/recommendations once I stopped. Took maybe a month to happen or could be my recent viewing habits pushed him out.

Anyway people do not need to do this even if the algorithm supports it.

One I'll mention by name is The Sonic Show (his avatar is a racoon). He blatantly lies in his thumbnails/titles. I fell for it once when I first came across the channel. It's not even about clickbait. They literally lie. Seriously this Youtuber should be banned.

"Puritan" is a perfect adaptation to describe the nonsense mentalities of judgement and hierarchy that the "complainers" have put out there. That's why people use it - not because they are misusing it.

So you never get super random video recommendations by youtube like everyone else does? There's always one random video or two that gets recommended to people for several weeks even though it's not the kind of video you normally watch. Clearly youtube pushes certain videos like that.

And it rewards it since people are more likely to click on videos with those thumbnails and titles. Which is why popular youtubers all keep on using those. They wouldn't if it didn't get them clicks, would they?

And YT's algorithm is not that good anyway. You watch one single video about, I dunno, bridge repairing one day and then suddenly you get recommendations for dozens of videos about bridges in general. Youtube assumes that you're some bridge enthusiast just because you watched one single video about a bridge that one time several weeks ago.

I do get random recommendations or ones slightly related to something I watched. Most are based on my viewing habits though.

I understand people use clickbait titles/thumbnails to grab attention...but if people stopped clicking them all the time they would fade from everyone's algorithm. At least that's been my experience.

Of course you'll still get recommended stuff based on a general subject that may be clickbait-y. It's up to you to ignore it.

My point is we should not watch or subscribe to people who do this. There's plenty of channels that don't. It's obvious who does.

Warner Bros. is expected to rebuff Paramount's $108 billion offer.

https://www.ft.com/content/6443abe1-...a-408a3e8f6077

I thought it was coming down to purely the shareholders themselves voting? WB can't stop that.

It's now official. Warner Bros. Discovery is now telling shareholders to reject Paramount's hostile bid.

https://deadline.com/2025/12/warner-...er-1236650715/

Which they don't have to do.

while true, there's little reason to believe they wouldn't for the most part since the Netflix deal is better for them. Unless there's a hostile takeover and they change the shareholders to people who will which has its own hurdles on its own so I find that unlikely to happen. The most likely scenario of this not happening would be if the government says no but that doesn't seem like it's going to be the case either.

How is the Netflix deal better for them? Their shares go up by almost a third under the Paramount deal vs. the Netflix one.

Less risky. Can Paramount pay because their funding is shaky, not for sure, they could be riddled with debt after it. Netflix is liquid, much lesser risk and includes protections in case things go wrong. There is a lot of scrutinity with hostile takeovers I don't even know all the legal stuff that goes on there, stock can drop quickly if it fails leaving them in a worse situation. It's about risk vs reward. Netflix deal gives shareholders guarantees basically in case anything goes wrong. So yeah it's not just about the bigger number but which scenario is going to assure them the most money.

Warner Bros. Discovery has a message for Elison of Paramount.

https://www.wsj.com/business/media/w...n-bid-7f942087

This is all surprisingly interesting. When Disney bought Fox, Discovery bought WB and Skydance bought Paramount it all amounted to a sad reminder that these giant companies can just merge with no meaningful resistance despite the obviously bad effects. At least with this we have some real serious competition over who gets it. It's still a "whoever wins, we lose" scenario but at least it's one interesting to follow.