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

961–970 of 1001 posts

Re: Netflix to Acquire Warner Bros

#961

Post by trunnell »

harmmonica wrote: post #908
trunnell wrote: post #602

Commenters here seem to be missing the larger David vs. Goliath story... Netflix was a silicon valley start-up with a tech founder (Reed) who teamed up with an LA movie buff (Ted). They tried to solve a problem: it was too hard to watch movies at home, and Hollywood seemed to hate new tech. The movie industry titans alternated between fighting Netflix and making deals. They fought Netflix's ability to bulk purchase a…

Had to read this a couple of times to try and figure out why, as of this moment, you’ve been downvoted because this seems like one of the more insightful comments on here. Maybe it’s too inside baseball about the post-deal opportunity? Anyway not supposed to talk about downvotes so… You were there for a while. Was/is studio capacity still a constraint on production? You read so many stories about how LA studios are s…

Yeah, it's ok, can't win 'em all. Lots of negativity in this thread. Maybe people have a gut feeling that "Netflix buying WB" fits into the preexisting narrative about media consolidation, and they're reacting negatively to media consolidation being a problem. I think that's more of a problem in the news media than in entertainment media. In entertainment, the bigger story is the tech-centered transitions, esp. to internet distribution. I don't think the consolidation narrative is a perfect fit in this case; this is a pretty different type of consolidation than the others in recent memory.

I think this is about Netflix's model reflecting a fundamental technology shift; any company not participating fully in that shift will be operating less and less efficiently compared to those that are. Look at the inside history of HBO's attempts to build a streaming platform; in the early 2010s their leadership knew they probably should, but were their hearts in it? Did they have executives with competence in this area? No, they outsourced it and mismanaged it. Repeatedly. But like you said, my view includes being a former Netflix employee so maybe I'm biased.

I don't have current information on whether or to what degree studio production capacity is a constraint. Content spending was publicly projected to grow, so studio capacity had to grow, which is why Netflix decided to build giant new studio facilities in New Mexico and New Jersey. Those were referenced in the Q&A Netflix held Friday morning [1]. Wild guess: Netflix's own studios run at full capacity, which is why they're continuing to expand them. I'd love to know if WB studios run at capacity.

> I assumed their interest was strictly a content play and the extra studio space might actually be an anchor they were willing to drag along to get the content/IP.

Doubt it. Like I said, I'm not an insider on that question and I'm 6 years out of date. But if I had to guess, it would be that WB studio capacity will be a highly productive asset for Netflix -- most likely, it will be more valuable connected to Netflix's global distribution model that it was when operated under WB's model.

[1] Q&A transcript https://s22.q4cdn.com/959853165/files/doc_events/2025/Dec/05...

Re: Netflix to Acquire Warner Bros

#962

Post by taeric »

Guvante wrote: post #959
taeric wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This particular one could be ok for them? A major cost for Netflix in the modern era is licensing contracts that never adjusted to the streaming world. As such, consumers may actually get access to some backlog of WB stuff that is otherwise not worth offering?

"Never adjust to the streaming world" implies the studios were wrong. Netflix is buying Warner Brothers and you think Netflix was wasting money on licensing costs? More like Netflix's bet that if it didn't share usage information it could keep underpaying for what it was getting paid off.

Licensing being a giant mess for media is not exactly news? Netflix reportedly got some really good deals early on, but of the kind that nobody was willing to do again.

They didn't have the luxury of first sale to protect their market, though. Which is a very sharp contrast to how they ran the DVD side of things.

So, it isn't that they were wasting money on licensing. Licensing kept getting more and more expensive. Not fully for nefarious reasons, but that doesn't change that it was so.

Re: Netflix to Acquire Warner Bros

#963

Post by dyauspitr »

PaulHoule wrote: post #194
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…

What happens to HBO Max? Will you be able to watch all that with a regular Netflix subscription? Seems the business doesn't make sense unless New co revenue >= Netflix + HBO revenue Also: is Netflix going to take the theatrical and traditional TV businesses seriously at all?

I’m already seeing shows from HBO Max directly on Netflix.

Re: Netflix to Acquire Warner Bros

#965

Post by averageRoyalty »

> Netflix to Acquire Warner Bros. Following the Separation of Discovery Global for a Total Enterprise Value of $82.7 Billion (Equity Value of $72.0 Billion)

I know this isn't the main point, but does anyone else find this sentence a nightmare to read? "Bros." makes me think we're in a new sentence; This would be fine if the next word wasn't arbitrarily capitalised. Why do people write like this? Why not just capitalise the proper nouns?

Re: Netflix to Acquire Warner Bros

#967

Post by popalchemist »

raw_anon_1111 wrote: post #155
mihaic wrote: post #126

It's always great to read about how the people the own the means of distribution aquire also the means of production, trying to create a meta-monopoly. /sarcasm I'm rooting for someone on the regulary side disliking all the crap that Netflix produces, and just shuts the whole thing down. Those 5 billion they'd have to pay for a breakup fee in that case would have me feeling better that I couldn't cancel their service…

There is no “monopoly” on either content distribution or creation. Amazon and Apple are both trillion dollar companies that have streaming services. Then there is Disney, Comcast (Peacock), Paramount, STARZ (standalone company), and AMC

There are only 4 major streaming services (Netflix, Prime, HBO Max, and Hulu), and only 5 major film studios, of which WB is one and it represents on its own 13% of the theatrical market. The combination of Netflix + WB + HBOMax likely represents well more than 25% of the entire market (when you combine streaming and theatrical).

Re: Netflix to Acquire Warner Bros

#968

Post by johnnyanmac »

slumberlust wrote: post #533
jmkd wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cinema is indeed second behind streaming. The theatrical window is now so short (~40) days that audiences are happy to wait for the increased benefits and reduced cost of watching at home.

Good. Movie theaters have been anti-consumer for decades. Time for them to reap what they sowed.

Yeah, now it's tv's turn to abuse the consumers!

Re: Netflix to Acquire Warner Bros

#969

Post by [deleted] »

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…

[deleted]

Re: Netflix to Acquire Warner Bros

#970

Post by lotsofpulp »

trunnell wrote: post #958
lotsofpulp wrote: post #803

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s nice to see business that rewarded customers with convenience win in the end. Well, except for Netflix refusing their catalogue to be indexed in the TV app on macOS and iOS. I won’t pay for Netflix until they drop that anti customer practice. If you want me to buy the video content you’re selling, it better be searchable in the TV app. And if not, there should be a better reason than you want to keep people trap…

Have you considered the possibility that much like App Store rules, Apple's requirements for "catalog indexing" go far, far beyond the Netflix catalog merely showing up in TV app? Perhaps the judgement about Netflix being anti-consumer might be hard to sustain if you could more fully inspect the details of what Apple requires.

No, and the proof is that some Netflix employee(s) “accidentally” enabled the integration in Feb 2025:

https://www.theverge.com/news/612911/netflix-apple-tv-app-su...

And then Netflix immediately disabled it:

https://www.theverge.com/news/613307/netflix-apple-tv-app-su...

Everyone else allows their content to be indexed, and does not pay Apple anything for it. Disney, Paramount, HBO, Peacock, they all could have refused like Netflix.

Post reply on HN