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

Netflix to Acquire Warner Bros

about.netflix.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

791–800 of 1001 posts

Re: Netflix to Acquire Warner Bros

#791

Post by nonethewiser »

tim1994 wrote: post #361
nonethewiser wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Any consolidation like this seems like a negative for consumers This is a very common narrative to this news. But coming into this news, I think the most common narrative against streaming was essentially "There is not enough consolidation." People were happy when Netflix was the streaming service, but then everyone pulled their content and have their own (Disney, Paramount, etc.)

The problem is content exclusivity. It would be great if all the content or at least most would be available on all platforms. At least eventually. That would be great for consumers. Mergers like this typically not.

It would be great for consumers if it was just free

Re: Netflix to Acquire Warner Bros

#792

Post by roguecoder »

dangus wrote: post #649
nonethewiser wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Any consolidation like this seems like a negative for consumers This is a very common narrative to this news. But coming into this news, I think the most common narrative against streaming was essentially "There is not enough consolidation." People were happy when Netflix was the streaming service, but then everyone pulled their content and have their own (Disney, Paramount, etc.)

This idea doesn’t mean those people are correct. Netflix was great when it was the only streaming service because all the legacy media companies licensed shows for cheap. They basically considered it bonus income like syndicated television. Most of Netflix’s content at that time was very popular but was basically just reruns. The Office, etc. It was a time when you’d be hard pressed to find any movie resembling a blo…

We could get back to that world with anti-trust enforcement and mandatory licensing, while still keeping whatever positive effects competition has had on content production (which I think are debatable at best: it seems like no one outside of low-budget stuff like Dropout is making anything interesting in the US right now.)

Re: Netflix to Acquire Warner Bros

#794

Post by atbpaca »

I just hope they won't destroy sagas like they did to the Witcher. In other words, I don't think this is good for future content as there is a risk movies/series will follow the same scripts, underlying story plots, cultural norms, same cinematography, etc. Quality going down.

Moreover, this also means more time for ads to pay for this merger.

Re: Netflix to Acquire Warner Bros

#795

Post by xp84 »

fnordpiglet wrote: post #790
xp84 wrote: post #763

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think Netflix's incentives, especially now that they have an ad tier, have changed. With a subscription service 10 years ago, you just need to have enough must-see content: - Original scripted TV series that become mainstream known and/or seen as prestige TV, like "The Crown," "Mindhunter," "Bridgerton," "Stranger Things" etc. - "Crown Jewel" reruns with huge fanbases such as The Office, Friends, Seinfeld, Modern F…

I’d note they’re not mutually exclusive revenue streams and both add meaningfully to their value. I think the reality is they peaked the first one and growth is in the second one. Subscriptions that are sticky however are much more valuable individually than an advertising tier user. But if you can cater to both and not downgrade subscriptions to ads tier you win in two parallel markets via the same platform. This is…

> they need to not lose the subscriptions

note: I hate ads so I'm not trying to manifest this, but can you explain why you're so sure of this?

To me, it seems like they "should" (for greed reasons, I mean, not for my happiness) hike the prices of subscriptions aggressively while keeping the ad-tier attractively-priced, moving as many people as possible over. This increases ad revenue and allows more YoY growth if their ML can manipulate you into more watch hours in 2027 than you do in 2026.

Sure, some people like me will probably drop Netflix before they'll pay $35 a month or endure ads. But the current delta is only $10. I suspect they can make $10 a head in ad revenue in a year -- and if they can make $15, they would break even if they lost 3 ad-free subscribers but gained 2 back onto the ad tier. Anything better than those numbers would be a net gain.

Re: Netflix to Acquire Warner Bros

#796

Post by qcnguy »

jodrellblank wrote: post #732
shadowgovt wrote: post #670

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oracle is still the company that does database for everyone with money to spend, and the percentage of companies (and governments, and NGOs) that discover a meaningful percentage of their very purpose is "moving data around" only grows over time. Their market is essentially constrained to "entities that use computers and want to sort data," which may as well be unconstrained. And in spite of all the ways they can be…

> " Microsoft is under stiff competition (they are selling a product, an operating system, that is a commodity competing with free) " Microsoft's Annual revenue from Azure is $75 billion. Office Server is $40 billion. Office Consumer is $6 billion. LinkedIn is $15Bn. Dynamics is $5Bn. Gaming/XBox is $15Bn. Search/Advertising is $14Bn. Devices at $5Bn. Intelligent Cloud at $87Bn. Windows $21Bn. They are a HUGE company…

> Oracle sell an RDBMS

Businesses Oracle is in:

- Databases (several)

- Cloud

- Software for planning everything related to manufacturing and logistics (ERP, supply chain management)

- Software for customer relationship management (CRM)

- Software for healthcare, managing hospitals and clinics

- Software for managing every aspect of running a bank

- Point of sale equipment

- Software for running utility companies

- Software for everything people related inside companies (payroll, HR, hiring, etc)

- Competing with Red Hat on commercial Linux

- Programming languages (several)

- Software for managing inventories

And a gazillion other things.

Re: Netflix to Acquire Warner Bros

#797

Post by xtracto »

theragra wrote: post #469
ayaros wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything is now re-consolidated under different media companies now. Instead of Ted Turner we have Larry Ellison, and Netflix, and Disney. So I think the biggest question is, what form of entertainment will eventually supplant streaming services? Whatever it is (or will be) will almost certainly be disregarded by most people.

AI generated by demand, most likely. Or AI generated by indie creators who have a vision but not a budget, and are provided with a platform to create content easily.

Reminds me of Red Vs Blue series of 2003 that were only using the Halo game. They were quite fun to watch. Imagine what can be done with AI nowadays!

Re: Netflix to Acquire Warner Bros

#798

Post by AtlasBarfed »

afavour wrote: post #182

Any consolidation like this seems like a negative for consumers. But at least it wasn’t bought by Larry Ellison, as was considered very likely (assuming this merger gets approved, in the current administration you never know). From a Hacker News perspective, I wonder what this means for engineers working on HBO Max. Netflix says they’re keeping the company separate but surely you’d be looking to move them to Netflix…

IP acquisition makes stuff like this inevitable. And the streaming companies still aren't good enough at making and sustaining content, while the older companies simply can make better stuff still.

It might be a path to breaking up some of the media conglomerates. Even if it's just different, newer conglomerates, maybe better media and news will shake out for a bit.

But with big tech making EVERYTHING worse it touches with no regards for wetware customers, it's probably a bad thing.

Re: Netflix to Acquire Warner Bros

#799

Post by lotsofpulp »

Kapura wrote: post #651

I feel like when I was growing up, I learned about how monopolization was bad for society when it came to industries like steel and rail. but for some reason in the 21st century we've decided that maybe corporations are somehow... better citizens or something? despite the evidence? Obviously, the reason it's gotten this bad is that lobbying is legal and private campaign funding is mandatory. Thanks again, citizens un…

1) steel and rail are important for survival, and actual monopolies that result you being only able to get a necessary good or service from 1 seller

2) there are a billion different ways to entertain yourself, including spending time on HN. It matters very little to real life that there are 5 different places to stream expensive media compared to 6. If they get too expensive, you can watch youtube or tiktok or come back to HN or whatever else.

Re: Netflix to Acquire Warner Bros

#800

Post by intexpress »

A few recent Warner Bros films / coproductions

Imagine if these had not had theatrical releases, or, had only had 1 week limited releases just to qualify for awards..

Tenet

Dune

The Batman

Barbie

Furiosa

Twisters

Minecraft

Sinners

Superman

Weapons

One Battle After Another

Post reply on HN