The worst acquisition in history, again • Hacker News Board

Re: The worst acquisition in history, again

#11

Post by Forgeties79 » Fri, Mar 06, 2026, 10:04 PM UTC

lotsofpulp wrote: post #7

Why is Netflix in the "Big Tech" categorization in the "value in market cap" graphic? I do not see how Netflix's primary business is any different than the businesses in the "Hollywood" categorization that also pay to make media and then sell it. Apple and Amazon can be in a different category because making and selling media is an ancillary part of their business. Alphabet does not make or curate any media, it just…

My guess is because Netflix gets money from subscriptions, which is a very different revenue model from traditional Hollywood. But again, completely a guess

Re: The worst acquisition in history, again

#12

Post by samrus » Fri, Mar 06, 2026, 10:05 PM UTC

lotsofpulp wrote: post #7

Why is Netflix in the "Big Tech" categorization in the "value in market cap" graphic? I do not see how Netflix's primary business is any different than the businesses in the "Hollywood" categorization that also pay to make media and then sell it. Apple and Amazon can be in a different category because making and selling media is an ancillary part of their business. Alphabet does not make or curate any media, it just…

Netflix is a streaming platform first and an entertainment studio second.

Its like youtube if youtube red didnt fail

Re: The worst acquisition in history, again

#13

Post by samrus » Fri, Mar 06, 2026, 10:06 PM UTC

bdangubic wrote: post #5

amazing that people still write articles like this and get away with it… everyone knows why this purchase was made and this mate is discussing things even my 12-year old would not bring up. X purchase maybe was understandable discussion but in 2026 writing article like this is borderline “criminal”

Elaborate please. This is the place for insiders to inform others

Re: The worst acquisition in history, again

#14

Post by alephnerd » Fri, Mar 06, 2026, 10:08 PM UTC

jmclnx wrote: post #2

They could be right, but I still have to go with Compaq buying Digital. Just about everyone working in IT in my area thought that was a crazy move by Compaq.

The Compaq acquisition made sense - it gave an upstart in Houston the distribution it needed to expand into enterprise and survive in an increasingly commodified PC and Server market.

Re: The worst acquisition in history, again

#15

Post by kgwgk » Fri, Mar 06, 2026, 10:11 PM UTC

samrus wrote: post #12

lotsofpulp wrote: post #7

Why is Netflix in the "Big Tech" categorization in the "value in market cap" graphic? I do not see how Netflix's primary business is any different than the businesses in the "Hollywood" categorization that also pay to make media and then sell it. Apple and Amazon can be in a different category because making and selling media is an ancillary part of their business. Alphabet does not make or curate any media, it just…

Netflix is a streaming platform first and an entertainment studio second. Its like youtube if youtube red didnt fail

Netflix may be a streaming platform but it’s streaming mostly Netflix’s content.

Re: The worst acquisition in history, again

#16

Post by lotsofpulp » Fri, Mar 06, 2026, 10:11 PM UTC

samrus wrote: post #12

lotsofpulp wrote: post #7

Why is Netflix in the "Big Tech" categorization in the "value in market cap" graphic? I do not see how Netflix's primary business is any different than the businesses in the "Hollywood" categorization that also pay to make media and then sell it. Apple and Amazon can be in a different category because making and selling media is an ancillary part of their business. Alphabet does not make or curate any media, it just…

Netflix is a streaming platform first and an entertainment studio second. Its like youtube if youtube red didnt fail

The streaming platform and entertainment studio cannot be considered 1st and 2nd things in 2026. The streaming platform is the delivery mechanism of the product made by the entertainment studio, no different than what Disney/Comcast/Paramount/WarnerBros Discovery does.

Youtube Red just got rebranded as Youtube Premium, and does not seem comparable because Youtube does not curate, it just sells advertising spots, and subscriptions to be able to skip ad breaks. You can watch any random person's content on Youtube or Youtube Premium, but you cannot on Netflix/Disney/etc.

Re: The worst acquisition in history, again

#17

Post by arthurjj » Fri, Mar 06, 2026, 10:11 PM UTC

lotsofpulp wrote: post #7

Why is Netflix in the "Big Tech" categorization in the "value in market cap" graphic? I do not see how Netflix's primary business is any different than the businesses in the "Hollywood" categorization that also pay to make media and then sell it. Apple and Amazon can be in a different category because making and selling media is an ancillary part of their business. Alphabet does not make or curate any media, it just…

Netflix pays like a Big Tech company, is valued like a Big Tech company and was part of FAANG. 10 years ago the streaming tech they had was fairly high tech, even if it's now pretty standard. So they're considered Big Tech for historical reason

Re: The worst acquisition in history, again

#18

Post by cyanydeez » Fri, Mar 06, 2026, 10:11 PM UTC

alephnerd wrote: post #9

Something I've mulled about this acquisition is that it appears to be a form of succession planning by Larry Ellison for his kids David (Skydance) and Megan (Annapurna). Oracle was always an Ellison driven enterprise, but neither David nor Megan had much aptitude or interest in enterprise SaaS, and a newer generation of operators took the reigns at Oracle in the 2010s like Catz, Hurd, Scilia, Magouyrk, and even Kuria…

Seems more cynical far right media control. You can call that succession planning i suppose.

Re: The worst acquisition in history, again

#19

Post by alephnerd » Fri, Mar 06, 2026, 10:12 PM UTC

lotsofpulp wrote: post #7

Why is Netflix in the "Big Tech" categorization in the "value in market cap" graphic? I do not see how Netflix's primary business is any different than the businesses in the "Hollywood" categorization that also pay to make media and then sell it. Apple and Amazon can be in a different category because making and selling media is an ancillary part of their business. Alphabet does not make or curate any media, it just…

> I do not see how Netflix's primary business is any different than the businesses in the "Hollywood" categorization that also pay to make media and then sell it

Netflix owns distribution and owns+sells VFX and animation services via Eyeline. Most "Netflix orignals" aren't actually produced by Netflix - Netflix just takes a capital stake in a production that was already in the works by an existing production company.

This made Netflix closer to Valve, and allows their IR team to make a valid case that they should be compared against (and thus deserve a valuation) comparable to other tech companies.

Re: The worst acquisition in history, again

#20

Post by pinkmuffinere » Fri, Mar 06, 2026, 10:12 PM UTC

> With his new toy having a leverage ratio north of 6x, David Ellison has promised $6 billion in “synergies” within three years. (Netflix Co-CEO Ted Sarandos put the figure closer to $16 billion, after examining WBD’s books.

What is it that these CEOs think they are seeing, that everyone else is missing? I can believe they have inflated egos, but they’re not totally crazy, right? My impression is that Netflix is fairly sober and results oriented, so I’m confused by the whole thing.