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

Paramount launches hostile bid for Warner Bros

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 424 posts

Re: Paramount launches hostile bid for Warner Bros

#71

Post by [deleted] »

teeray wrote: post #61
Jtsummers wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't need the streaming service though, you can just do without or find other methods of obtaining their content. It's not like food, electricity, or water where you may have no actual options or very limited options. Movies and shows are wants, not needs, and people can walk away and fill the time some other way.

Saying everyone should just quit streaming and go touch grass or read a book is not a productive recommendation. It's been tried for decades and fails because people really like TV and Movies. Given that, the discussion here needs to start from the assumption that people will continue to watch TV and movies and suffer meaningful quality of life impacts when they do not.

[deleted]

Re: Paramount launches hostile bid for Warner Bros

#72

Post by JumpCrisscross »

notepad0x90 wrote: post #30

I thought I read somewhere paramount is in survival mode, avoiding risky projects and focusing on reliable projects. This is surprising indeed. Amazon took MGM, maybe netflix can take over paramount after it takes over warner bros? I know people have strong opinions on this, but both from studios like warner and netflix, their quality has been subpar, i don't think this will change much in terms of risk taking. There…

> thought I read somewhere paramount is in survival mode

Paramount's multi-year sale process deserves an HBO miniseries. But at this point, it's a de facto LBO platform for the Ellisons.

Re: Paramount launches hostile bid for Warner Bros

#73

Post by fyrabanks »

raw_anon_1111 wrote: post #51
indigodaddy wrote: post #8

Does WB have to pay the breakup fee to Netflix if a Paramount hostile takeover succeeds?

This has nothing to do with the Netflix bid. Warner bros is being divided into the cable TV stations + discover channel stations and the movie studio and the backlog is separate. Netflix wants the movie studio + tv back catalog

Netflix also wants HBO / HBO Max. They're just leaving the Discovery stuff.

Re: Paramount launches hostile bid for Warner Bros

#74

Post by JumpCrisscross »

awongh wrote: post #67
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and we'll see meaningful copyright reform Are you betting on the content conglomerate bidding tens of billions, or the nepo baby LBO shop wearing the corpse of a movie studio as a salmon hat to spur copyright reform?

Paramount is dead?

> Paramount is dead?

Paramount broke its tradition of barely treading water [1] in 2023 by booking multibillion cable losses [2] before being acquired in a de facto LBO [3] at half the price it traded at in 2005 [4]. (90% off its 2021 peak, though that may have been meme-y.)

Paramount Skydance–the one bidding for Warner–has $15bn of debt on $600mm operating cash flow supporting $15bn of equity trading above book value while still posting losses [5].

It's not dead. But it's at least necrotic.

[1] https://tradingeconomics.com/cbs:us:net-income

[2] https://www.filmtake.com/distribution/paramounts-financial-t...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paramount_Skydance

[4] https://stockanalysis.com/stocks/para/history/

[5] https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/PSKY/key-statistics/

Re: Paramount launches hostile bid for Warner Bros

#75

Post by sippeangelo »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #72
notepad0x90 wrote: post #30

I thought I read somewhere paramount is in survival mode, avoiding risky projects and focusing on reliable projects. This is surprising indeed. Amazon took MGM, maybe netflix can take over paramount after it takes over warner bros? I know people have strong opinions on this, but both from studios like warner and netflix, their quality has been subpar, i don't think this will change much in terms of risk taking. There…

> thought I read somewhere paramount is in survival mode Paramount's multi-year sale process deserves an HBO miniseries. But at this point, it's a de facto LBO platform for the Ellisons.

But who's gonna produce that once Paramount owns HBO?

Re: Paramount launches hostile bid for Warner Bros

#76

Post by __turbobrew__ »

ngcazz wrote: post #41

No matter who wins, we lose.

I have seen several aspects of entertainment in my life get squeezed for money (Magic The Gathering, movies, TV streaming, video games) and I have decided to basically quit any form of entertainment which is solely controlled by large corporations.

People get extremely angry when Magic The Gathering charges more money, for more exclusive products, in more frequently occurring releases. Rage, grief, and sorrow over an aspect of your life that you allow a singular company to control. It doesn’t have to be this way. You can walk away , and find more fulfilling activities that you control.

This is what the kids call “touching grass”.

At this point I don’t watch TV, I don’t watch movies, I don’t play Magic The Gathering, I only play video games over 10 years old.

As I have gotten older I see now that this entertainment is junk food that replaces real satisfaction and accomplishment in life. Humans now more than ever have the opportunity to learn and do anything, but instead they spend it squandered on a shadow of real life.

Re: Paramount launches hostile bid for Warner Bros

#77

Post by perihelions »

moffers wrote: post #44
linhns wrote: post #29

Sounds like Paramount bosses are bidding in anger.

I think the political angle of this should not be discounted

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46000977 ("Larry Ellison discussed axing CNN hosts with White House in takeover bid talks (theguardian.com)")

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46048351 ("Larry Ellison Met with Trump to Discuss Which CNN Reporters They Plan to Fire (techdirt.com)")

Viewing this acquisition in terms of simple revenue alone is like positing Musk bought Twitter for its ad revenue. Total information control is priceless.

(In case anyone hasn't kept up with the plutocratic oligarchy in the US: Oracle's Larry Ellison currently owns Paramount (since July 2024), and Warner Bros. Entertainment owns CNN. This isn't explained in the CNBC OP: David Ellison is Larry's son and the token CEO).

Re: Paramount launches hostile bid for Warner Bros

#78

Post by stopbulying »

afavour wrote: post #37

I'm curious how often tactics like this work. It is essentially asking the Warner stockholders to act against the wishes of their elected board. It seems the main thrust of the pitch is "we're friends with Trump therefore more likely to win approval" which is so deeply gross but also probably persuasive to many. Jared Kushner is involved in the Paramount bid so you know they're greasing the right wheels.

"Jared Kushner is part of Paramount's hostile bid for Warner Bros. Discovery" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46195014

Re: Paramount launches hostile bid for Warner Bros

#79

Post by stopbulying »

jm4 wrote: post #33
miohtama wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trump dislikes Paramount, thought? https://deadline.com/2025/12/trump-paramount-60-minutes-davi...

He did until they paid him off, fired people he doesn't like and his buddy bought it.

Like Comcast (Philadelphia) acquired NBC/SNL in 2011?

Wasn't there a former Comcast employee as CEO of "X" initially?

Re: Paramount launches hostile bid for Warner Bros

#80

Post by JumpCrisscross »

afavour wrote: post #37

I'm curious how often tactics like this work. It is essentially asking the Warner stockholders to act against the wishes of their elected board. It seems the main thrust of the pitch is "we're friends with Trump therefore more likely to win approval" which is so deeply gross but also probably persuasive to many. Jared Kushner is involved in the Paramount bid so you know they're greasing the right wheels.

> curious how often tactics like this work

Hostile takeovers hit their zenith "in the 1980s" [1], when about 50% of attempts succeeded [2].

Since then, Delaware courts have become more Board friendly (specifically, friendly to takeover defences), antitrust made "it more difficult for companies with large market shares to acquire competitors without some level of cooperation from the target company," and stocks became more expensive [1]. (I'm struggling to find recent literature on frequencies.)

Compared to the 1980s and pre-Covid hostile takeover zenith, stocks remain expensive. But money is chaper, particularly for the politically connected. Antitrust is a wild card. And Warner has reduced takeover defences given it's already in the market for a sale (Revlon duties).

So...somewhere below 50%?

[1] https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2020/11/08/the-comeback-of-h...

[2] https://faculty.fiu.edu/~daiglerr/pdf/hostile_takeovers.pdf

Post reply on HN