Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Amazon is reportedly negotiating to acquire MGM for about $9B

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 255 posts

Re: Amazon is reportedly negotiating to acquire MGM for about $9B

#121

Post by afavour »

JohnHaugeland wrote: post #97
afavour wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The FTC exists to protect the interests of consumers. They're not just the "Anti-Monopoly Commission".

The FEC only gets involved over specific things. If you want the FEC to be involved, you have to be able to say why they're involved. Instead of giving a feel good story about what you imagine they're for, please provide an FTC-appropriate vision of what they could get involved over It'd be like if I knocked a chair over, and you said "I'm calling the police," and I said "why would the police get involved," and you s…

"The FEC only gets involved over specific things."

On what basis? Legal restriction or historical precedent? This is how we get timid regulation, by never moving beyond what has gone before.

"The basic statute enforced by the FTC, Section 5(a) of the FTC Act, empowers the agency to investigate and prevent unfair methods of competition, and unfair or deceptive acts or practices affecting commerce. This creates the Agency’s two primary missions: protecting competition and protecting consumers. The statute gives the FTC authority to seek relief for consumers, including injunctions and restitution, and in some instances to seek civil penalties from wrongdoers. The FTC has the ability to implement trade regulation rules defining with specificity acts or practices that are unfair or deceptive and the Commission can publish reports and make legislative recommendations to Congress about issues affecting the economy. The Commission enforces various antitrust laws under Section 5(a) of the FTC Act as well as the Clayton Act. The FTC monitors all its orders to ensure compliance."

https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/media-resources/what-ftc-doe...

Your comparison is a little absurd. If the police had a specific role in investigating and preventing unfair chair usage than calling the police would seem like a very logical course of action.

In this case, the FTC has a clear role in preventing unfair methods of competition. Huge media conglomerates closing out access to smaller competitors via the software and hardware consumers use to watch TV could certainly be considered unfair.

Re: Amazon is reportedly negotiating to acquire MGM for about $9B

#122

Post by dageshi »

GeekyBear wrote: post #109
dageshi wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In any other industry, having companies compete against each other to create the best product in order to attract customers is the ideal situation... except television? People might not like balkanization of content, but it forces different services to compete against each other in a way that produces more and better content overall. More to the point, it's frankly no different to how TV channels used to work in the…

>it forces different services to compete against each other in a way that produces more and better content overall It seems more like another avenue through which a small number of mega-corporations can control ever increasing shares of the media marketplace to me. In my view, some sort of mandatory licensing scheme would force individually owned production companies to compete against each other to produce the best…

A small number of mega corporations have always controlled the media marketplace, the difference is streaming is shaking things up and making a new set of mega-corporations in addition to the existing ones.

Re: Amazon is reportedly negotiating to acquire MGM for about $9B

#123

Post by huitzitziltzin »

jjcon wrote: post #113
huitzitziltzin wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Amazon is closer to a level of government than traditional company. I'm not sure what this could possibly mean. > is a threat to a well regulated democracy Ok - tell me how. Is Jeff Bezos going to... buy the Presidency? A Senate seat? Or... ? I really don't see what you have in mind. > IMO Amazon should be split into a dozen companies. You can do this if you want. You could split AWS from the retail operation, I gu…

Did I say anything about bezos? No. Quit deflecting and making strawmen. Amazon is already under antitrust charges in the EU and under investigation for antitrust in the US, stop ignoring that fact.

> Did I say anything about bezos?

I'm trying to understand what you meant when you said that Amazon is a threat to democracy. That is a very strong claim. What exactly do you mean and what is your evidence for it?

> stop ignoring that fact

I'm not ignoring the fact that there is criticism of Amazon and that it is being investigated. I'm expressing an opinion on the basis of professional expertise: I do not see Amazon as a monopolist in general, nor do I see any particular concern from this acquisition.

Re: Amazon is reportedly negotiating to acquire MGM for about $9B

#124

Post by vel0city »

jjcon wrote: post #85
huitzitziltzin wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m all ears if you have a good idea. “Obviously ridiculous” sounds like a great standard to block an acquisition. Explain what’s obviously ridiculous about it. I judge these things on the potential for harm to consumers. I don’t see that here. Perhaps you do. Do you see this leading to increased prices or a reduction in quantity consumed? (And of what, btw?) That’s how we make these judgments so if it’s obvious to y…

> Do you see this leading to increased prices or a reduction in quantity consumed? We’re way past that at this point. Amazon is closer to a level of government than traditional company. They are already under multiple antitrust investigations in multiple countries and jurisdictions so it’s nuts for you to go all pikachu face on the comment that they may be guilty of such. The amount of power Amazon has over media, re…

> The amount of power Amazon has over media, retail and internet is unparalleled and is a threat to a well regulated democracy.

I don't subscribe to any Amazon-owned media. I consume tons of media practically every day. If Amazon was a monopoly in media, shouldn't it be near impossible for me to get non-Amazon owned media?

I've purchased maybe a dozen items from Amazon in the last few years. It makes up I somehow manage to host tons of applications both professionally and personally. I only really use S3 and Amazon DNS, and that's in only a few limited places and could be easily replaced. If Amazon was a monopoly in internet services, shouldn't I pretty much be forced to use them for something?

I don't even have to try and I can avoid them for my own usages, both professionally and personally.

Re: Amazon is reportedly negotiating to acquire MGM for about $9B

#125

Post by huitzitziltzin »

ncallaway wrote: post #117
lotsofpulp wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The interaction with copyright invariably creates issues for the end-consumer, which is why consumers in the media ecosystem are often better off when distributors and producers are separate. And addressing it via enforcing separate distributors and producers allows the copyright issue (the real issue) to go unchecked, since politically, it’s harder to attack it as a problem. It might even be politically necessary…

To me, the problem with copyright law is that there are entities that have businesses that are built on copyright protection that are so powerful they can nearly dictate what the copyright laws are ( cough Disney cough ). So, from my perspective, any system that allows those powerful entities to continue to accumulate more power and wealth is always going to harm efforts to change copyright law. We need to weaken the…

> copyright law is that there are entities that have businesses that are built on copyright protection that are so powerful they can nearly dictate what the copyright laws are (cough Disney cough).

I fully agree w/ this criticism of copyright law. I do not think that has a substantial intersection w/ the competitive effects of this proposed acquisition.

Re: Amazon is reportedly negotiating to acquire MGM for about $9B

#126

Post by setr »

mnd999 wrote: post #95
ghaff wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suppose it depends on how you view Amazon. They are a (primarily streaming) content distributor although they're also a (primarily TV) studio. It's a reasonable argument that a distributor acquiring a large back catalog of film IP is a vertical merger. Although to the welfare-improving point, giving that back catalog a straightforward route to consumers is not necessarily a bad thing.

It is a bad thing for the consumer because it means more exclusive titles which is gives rise to a false market. It looks like consumers have a choice of platforms with content, but when that content is exclusive the consumer ends up having to pay for all the platforms to see the content they want to see. This in effect means more costs for the consumer and less choice.

Isn’t this already the mechanism in play? They’re all signing exclusivity deals between streaming companies, as the streaming companies strive to differentiate on really their only notable difference: their catalog.

An MGM buy just further buys into the practice

Re: Amazon is reportedly negotiating to acquire MGM for about $9B

#127

Post by NikolaeVarius »

jjcon wrote: post #119
huitzitziltzin wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Netflix has exclusive content. ABC, NBC, Discovery, ... all have exclusive content. Why does Amazon buying MGM and getting some exclusive MGM content harm consumers ?

Less competitive marketplaces harm consumers. Consolidation means less competition. Amazon is already under antitrust charges and investigations in the EU and US for these types of misdeeds.

So literally any acquisition is bad?

Re: Amazon is reportedly negotiating to acquire MGM for about $9B

#128

Post by benmller313 »

throwaway1777 wrote: post #114
dalbasal wrote: post #66

There reality of current equity valuations is such that, if sustained, there is some some pretty savage consolidation to come. The only limit is antitrust, or fear of. $9bn is 0.5% of AMZN's current market cap, so $9bn represents a daily price fluctuation. They also have $45bn in cash reserves, so amazon could buy 5 MGMs without borrowing or issuing stock. That's not even a lot! Apple, Google & FB have $200bn, $140bn…

Apple does offer a dividend fwiw. The others often use cash for share buybacks which is part of why the price is so high. So it’s not entirely like they just let the money sit there.

I don't think Amazon has done stock buy backs in almost 10 years.

Re: Amazon is reportedly negotiating to acquire MGM for about $9B

#129

Post by TeMPOraL »

kingsuper20 wrote: post #53
ncallaway wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The vertical integration of the distribution of media and the production of media is extremely problematic because of the way copyright operates in this country. I think you have to examine vertical integration in copyright affected industries differently than you would in, say, the vertical integration of steel production with a company that consumes steel. The interaction with copyright invariably creates issues fo…

To repeat myself in another post here, copyright is a funny thing in that it proposes a form of monopoly, just on the small scale. I think it's hard to avoid the conclusion that increasingly strong copyright holders (given all of the media mergers) implies increasingly strong copyright law. Add that to the expanding ability of parsing for copyright violations and I can imagine the Disney Police parachuting in to arre…

Don't forget about Disney Stasi agents standing behind you just now, tasked with protecting the good name of the House of Mouse.

Re: Amazon is reportedly negotiating to acquire MGM for about $9B

#130

Post by NeuNeurosis »

huitzitziltzin wrote: post #67
jjcon wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I am an economist and that is my field. I disagree with your take Maybe economists need to get a new take cause this shit is obviously ridiculous EDIT: see the already pending antitrust litigation against Amazon in EU and US

I’m all ears if you have a good idea. “Obviously ridiculous” sounds like a great standard to block an acquisition. Explain what’s obviously ridiculous about it. I judge these things on the potential for harm to consumers. I don’t see that here. Perhaps you do. Do you see this leading to increased prices or a reduction in quantity consumed? (And of what, btw?) That’s how we make these judgments so if it’s obvious to y…

But it's not just about 'consumers' is it? I mean its great and all that you are playing devils advocate and using your education to argue on behalf of a Trillion dollar corporation but this isn't just about what an economist thinks, especially since economists get it wrong all the time. This entire discussion is about peoples natural reaction to a super large entity, that as one of your supporters put it "single-handedly makes up 4% of the US economy" buying more of the US economy thus further concentrating money/power in fewer hands.
Post reply on HN