Live data from Hacker News

Amazon acquires MGM for $8.5B

reuters.com

161–170 of 844 posts

Re: Amazon acquires MGM for $8.5B

#161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s a funny example considering mPow got banned from Amazon a few days ago for manipulating reviews.

I guess it would be practically impossible to remove the item from the video, though. Or will Amazon shoot the scene multiple times, with different items?

I assume that can be handled trivially with today’s video editing capabilities.

Re: Amazon acquires MGM for $8.5B

#162

As a football fan I hate this, now a major broadcaster (Amazon TNF) owns a gambling company (MGM sports book) not good for the sport.

Why? I watched a few sporting events recently and I was surprised how often sports gambling was mentioned during the broadcast. Does that annoy you too?

Re: Amazon acquires MGM for $8.5B

#163

If I had to pick a single politically uniting issue, breaking up Amazon and big tech would be it. Why has this not happened yet? Is the out of power party afraid the in power party will get credit? (This has been discussed when both parties were in power) If the government can't get something with this kind of support done, I fear the road we are headed down .

It hasn’t happened because big tech lobbies against it and deploy capital not only in the political arena but the general consumers culture landscape.

Re: Amazon acquires MGM for $8.5B

#164

Dear Amazon, the Prime menu is fairly awful - especially trying to find a way back to a previously watched series.

couldn't agree more. who the hell made it. Its a mess. With separate seasons in different places.

Their awful UI is an artifact of trying to be a storefront (where shows are sold by the season) and a streaming service (where you can binge without regard for seasons).

Re: Amazon acquires MGM for $8.5B

#166
post #77

I wonder if Amazon will change MGM's stance on "Movies Anywhere"? MGM is one of the few major studios that currently does not participate in that. OT: how the heck does MA actually work? Suppose I buy a movie from Apple that came from a studio that supports MA. It almost immediately shows up in my Amazon Prime Video library, my Fandango library, and others. I then stream it using the Fandango app on my TV. Does it st…

The studios are basically paying the burden of cost for MA. It's one of the big reasons Paramount and MGM haven't joined, it's expensive on the studio side.

Bandwidth is a nearly zero cost for a lot of the companies streaming the video on MA anyways. Apple, Amazon, Google, Microsoft, all don't care meaningfully about bandwidth cost anymore, especially for prerecorded content they can CDN all over the place. The biggest value to a streaming provider participating in MA is user acquisition: People might redeem their existing collection on MA, and then buy new titles on their platform.

Re: Amazon acquires MGM for $8.5B

#167

So what we're seeing is a repeat of the film industry from 1930's-1950's. You want to see a Paramount movie, you must go to a Paramount theater. Today you want to watch an Apple show you must go to Apple's VOD. We could really use laws that force, once again, some sort of separation between production and distribution. Better stuff gets made in this kind of ecosystem.

This will be my prediction: the usage of piracy to consume this type of content will increase. And they will blame PLATFORM X (or just the ol'piratebay) for the losses of revenue, when in reality it's just a matter of people not being able to access content because everything has a paywall gate. It's like they want to bring cable TV back to the internet, and you had massive bills just for channels subscriptions.

Like this, you mean? https://www.wired.com/story/2021-platinum-age-piracy-streami...

Re: Amazon acquires MGM for $8.5B

#168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that people are united about breaking up Amazon and frankly I don't really see the damage to consumer necessary to break it up; products come faster, cheaper. Could you articulate why Amazon should be broken up? Most of the arguments I've seen boil down to "It's so big" and not really "It's effectively dominated x market and there is no competition there" or even "they are harming competition by pre-ins…

I would split it into three things: 1. They have the size and market control to crush and/or acquire all competitors e.g. diapers.com https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-07-29/amazon-em... 2. They purport to operate a neutral marketplace where they aren't responsible for the end product while also controlling what products you see and what company you will buy from and choose the ones that give them the best…

>They have the size and market control to crush and/or acquire all competitors

I don't think that is true for all competitors, but it definitely is for many competitors. It's a good point if they are using that power, which I think they are, especially in particular industries. Same applies to Facebook, Apple, and many other companies as well.

>2. They purport to operate a neutral marketplace where they aren't responsible for the end product while also controlling what products you see and what company you will buy from and choose the ones that give them the best margin. The huge problem of counterfeit and faulty products on Amazon directly harms the consumer and because of (1) there isn't a general market remedy.

That's two different things, isn't it? Counterfeit products are a problem and a non-neutral market is a different problem. I think the non-neutral market bit is already covered by existing regulations, isn't it? Shouldn't we simply apply the rules we have?

>3. They leverage their position as market maker to figure out what products to manufacture and undercut innovative companies with their massive scale. In the short term this is a net benefit to consumers who get a cheaper product but it creates a mess of bad incentives down the line.

This one I've seen before but not as an argument to break them up - it's an interesting argument to me because I think a lot of companies engage in these practices. Grocery stores classically would release basic cheerios for example and undercut the price of the brand

Re: Amazon acquires MGM for $8.5B

#169
post #87
post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or we could fall back to watching movies made from the ‘30s to the ‘50s, that’s what I have been doing for more than half a year now and it has been wonderful for my mental well-being (they really knew how to make comedies back then, even after the Hayes code).

Any recommendations?

Anything Marx Brothers is hilarious

Re: Amazon acquires MGM for $8.5B

#170
post #98

So what we're seeing is a repeat of the film industry from 1930's-1950's. You want to see a Paramount movie, you must go to a Paramount theater. Today you want to watch an Apple show you must go to Apple's VOD. We could really use laws that force, once again, some sort of separation between production and distribution. Better stuff gets made in this kind of ecosystem.

Except watching online is nowhere near as inconvenient as only watching movies from theaters in your area. It will most will likely consolidate to 4 major players so we're looking at 4 subscriptions to watch most new content. There's nothing stopping production companies from producing content, if it's compelling enough they'll still be able to license it out to the big players. When everything's online the primary d…

> It will most will likely consolidate to 4 major players so we're looking at 4 subscriptions to watch most new content.

How do you see this playing out when there have been so many big investments by traditional players to put forward new streaming services?

The major players went from Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon and have now added Disney+, HBO Max, Peacock, Apple TV+, and Paramount+, with more on the way.

Untangling all the licensing deals is quite confusing as well and starts to get into the innards of production. I always associate Friends and Seinfeld with NBC, yet they aren't on Peacock, they're on HBO Max and Hulu, respectively. That and content shifting from one platform to another constantly, makes the web even more confusing and it's hard to determine which services you really want.

Post reply on HN