Sounds like Paramount bosses are bidding in anger.
One can only wish to have that amount of money to bid in anger.
Don't worry, it's other peoples' money.
Paramount launches hostile bid for Warner Bros
121–130 of 424 posts
Re: Paramount launches hostile bid for Warner Bros
#122Larry Ellison is my named enemy
larry ellison is guilty of all of the things they accuse soros of doing
Re: Paramount launches hostile bid for Warner Bros
#123Re: Paramount launches hostile bid for Warner Bros
#124Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Total information control is priceless. Except there is robust competition in media —be it news, social, etc. I think the political angle in terms of motivation is overstated. In terms of closing the deal though, it’s huge. David Ellison has been producing movies for quite some time. So his desire to become a big time player in that space would be a believable motivation. But he can use his father’s connections to…
> Except there is robust competition in media —be it news, social, etc. As of a few years ago, there were six corporations owning 90% of US media: NewsCorp, TimeWarner, Comcast, Disney, Viacom, Sony. * https://www.reddit.com/r/coolguides/comments/fs5g0b/more_tha... * https://techstartups.com/2020/09/18/6-corporations-control-9... Add to that local channel ownership (like Sinclair) concentration: * https://www.gsb.sta…
[flagged]
Re: Paramount launches hostile bid for Warner Bros
#125No 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…
> As I have gotten older I see now that this entertainment is junk food that replaces real satisfaction and accomplishment in life
A bit too condescending if you ask me. People are free to choose to spend time on things they find entertaining and that has no bearing on whether you find it "junk food" or whether the company producing the entertainment is trying to squeeze every penny they can out of it.
Re: Paramount launches hostile bid for Warner Bros
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
Some context: "Affinity Partners, the private equity firm led by Jared Kushner, is part of Paramount's hostile takeover bid for Warner Bros Discovery, according to a regulatory filing." https://www.axios.com/2025/12/08/jared-kushner-paramount-war...
Thank you, I had no idea how this was politically related, and honestly cannot keep track of all the corruption these days anyways. How does anyone? This is pretty much a genuine question.
are executives breathing? then there is corruption. start following the money and you'll find it, we're in the new gilded age
Re: Paramount launches hostile bid for Warner Bros
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
Paramount sold themselves to Skydance who now get referred to as Paramount because Paramount is the older, stabler brand. That sale is generally considered to have pulled Paramount out of survival mode, though it will probably be at least a few more quarters before it the results are seen. (Arguably, Skydance's ideas for Paramount are too similar to the weird Paramount and CBS divorce era, that I find it hard to beli…
Skydance is also known as the then-obscure company that picked up Pixar head John Lasseter when his reputation for being overly affectionate got him pushed out of Disney. It's one of the Ellison family's forays into media. David's sister/Larry's daughter Megan has Annapurna. Annapurna produced the Spike Jonze's AI romance "Her" and many of the the most prominent indie games of the last decade (Outer Wilds, Cocoon, St…
Right. Also the weird part of the Skydance Lasseter drama is not just that is happened once, there, but that it happened at nearly the same time but worse at Annapurna. Annapurna games division that had done so well last decade got purged by rehiring someone to oversee it who had been fired the first time for the "overly affectionate" types of problems just before Annapurna's "Golden Age" and was hired as much to better align the games division with making movie knockoffs rather than producing indie darlings (which was a "distraction" for a company trying so hard to be a movie company). (You can almost excuse "hired someone Disney fired for this reason", but how do you excuse "we already fired once for this reason"?)
The Ellison family's willingness to be tied to serial harassers, and in the case of Annapurna in direct expense of being a beloved media producer, makes you wonder what worse skeletons that family has in its closet if this is already just the open awful stuff they want us to know about their close associates.
Re: Paramount launches hostile bid for Warner Bros
#128Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the political angle of this should not be discounted
I think it gives Netflix an advantage. When it comes up in front of a judge he'll note the obvious conflict of interest and Trump's idiotic pronouncements, like the fact that he said he will be personally involved, and rule for Netflix.
This will go to SCOTUS, which typically gives the administration preferential treatment. The US's current level of corruption is way too high to assume your scenario.
Re: Paramount launches hostile bid for Warner Bros
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the political angle of this should not be discounted
Some context: "Affinity Partners, the private equity firm led by Jared Kushner, is part of Paramount's hostile takeover bid for Warner Bros Discovery, according to a regulatory filing." https://www.axios.com/2025/12/08/jared-kushner-paramount-war...
The dark side of all this is a propaganda network.
The government and who runs it should not be in business I'm sorry. This isn't free markets, it's manipulation and corruption.
Re: Paramount launches hostile bid for Warner Bros
#130Sounds like Paramount bosses are bidding in anger.
I think the political angle of this should not be discounted
Stage AGs have a strong role to play in anti-trust law. And the other party they're suing _isnt_ a Federal agency this time.
Now maybe nothing matters. But conflicts of interest will come up in those cases. Trump doesn't win _everything_. Trump wins at places where the Supreme Court is using him for their own project of reworking the constitutional order. Basically Trump shoots up a volley with some absolutely batshit PoV, they interpret the topic in some saner (still crazy) right wing legal idea. And the Supreme Court fast track's these cases about executive power.
This case would be State AGs having independent standing to challenge major M&A.
It will drag things out at a minimum, in a way the Supreme Court's rapid resolution of executive branch cases is not dragged out.