Didn't Tom Cruise break away from Paramount for WB rather publicly, recently? Would be kind of funny for Paramount to buy WB.
Netflix to Buy WB
10,854 Views |
174 Replies |
Last: 14 hrs ago by torrid
Paramount has sent a new letter taking its $30 per share all-cash offer for Warner Bros. Discovery directly to shareholders, slamming Netflix’s deal and calling his financing for the $108.4 billion bid “air-tight.”
— TheWrap (@TheWrap) December 10, 2025
Read more: https://t.co/zuZGQWwXv7
📸 Getty Images pic.twitter.com/4k4KW8YYDr
Paramount has raised the stakes in its hostile bid for WBD, and may yet go higher. Now Netflix must decide how much it wants to venture into junk credit-rating territory, or play games with its stock, to secure the prize.@WilliamCohan reports: https://t.co/u8wAGjoxjf
— Puck (@PuckNews) December 10, 2025
SCOOP: Paramount Skydance is considering raising its takeover offer for Warner Bros. Discovery by as much as 10% as it plots its next move to break up a merger agreement with Netflix, The Post has learned. $WBD $PSKY $NTFLXhttps://t.co/VAYiUQhiCm
— Charles Gasparino (@CGasparino) December 11, 2025
WB has rejected Paramount's offer.
The board encouraged shareholders to vote against it. It still has to go through shareholders, who like money.
Yeah, this is still far from over. All signs point to Paramount eventually coming back with an even bigger offer, but we shall see.
veryfuller
Joined:
Jul 2, 2018
Posts:
811
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
AG
I fully don't understand why WB is resistant to Paramount. Is it just the politics of it? Because it seems like as a consumer we should want Paramount to win because they are the only option to actually preserve some sort of recognizable studio at the end of this. And if you want studios and theaters to continue to function, that is better than Netflix just gobbling it up and giving us more streaming crap. Am I wrong?
WBD doesn't like that the Paramount money is not fully Ellison money. Like $40B of it comes from some Middle East funds that no one really knows what they are.
veryfuller said:
I fully don't understand why WB is resistant to Paramount. Is it just the politics of it? Because it seems like as a consumer we should want Paramount to win because they are the only option to actually preserve some sort of recognizable studio at the end of this. And if you want studios and theaters to continue to function, that is better than Netflix just gobbling it up and giving us more streaming crap. Am I wrong?
Paramount says they will keep WB operating as a separate studio but at some point when its time to cut something to help with ROI someone will ask "why do we own 2 giant studios that essentially do the same thing." There will be downsizing when its time to make the giant cuts. The true prize is the IP. Netflix doesn't currently own a studio. They may pay for tons of content that mainly airs on their AP, but they now will have an in-house option for creating content should they want to go that route rather than buy what other studios and productions create. The IP is still the prize for Netflix too, but at least its not a case of 2 of the same company becoming 1. I feel WB as a company can still exist in a world of Netflix whereas a Paramount WB merger winds up like the merger of any other giant companies in the same space where they wind up as just 1 company thats slightly bigger than the 2 that existed before it 10 years earlier.
Bingo.
For instance, one of my good friends is a high-up in Warner Bros theatrical marketing. She's been there since The Dark Knight days and recently ran the marketing campaigns for both Barbie and Superman. If Paramount buys WB, her job almost assuredly goes away. Yes, Paramount will still release Warner Bros movies, but it'll be the Paramount marketing team who's marketing them all. Now, translate that across basically every single film/theatrical division. Sure, some WB folks would make the cut, and maybe my friend would as well. One would assume that Paramount going from marketing 12-15 movies a year to 24-30 movies a year would require a larger marketing team than they have now. But Ellison has already said that *most* WB folks will lose their jobs, and has implied that Paramount will basically handle all production/post-production/marketing/etc duties for both studios.
Whereas, if Netflix buys WB, my friend's job almost assuredly remains intact, as does the jobs of every other WB theatrical division, as does the Warner Bros studio lot, etc, seeing as Netflix doesn't own a studio. As Ted Sarandos has publicly stated multiple times now, they're basically going to let WB keep operating as usual, making their 12-15 theatrical movies a year, then integrating that production/content with that of Netflix. Granted, yes, there's the whole theatrical window issue with Netflix, but even on that I'm starting to believe Sarandos when he says they're not going to **** with WB theatrical windows for at least the foreseeable future.
So, yeah.
I still think Paramount comes back with a higher bid, that this is about nothing other than money, and that it's all far from over. But overall, the more I've learned, the less I'm against Netflix winning, at least compared to a few weeks ago. And to be clear it has nothing to do with politics or anything like that. I really do think that the "spirit" of Warner Bros, HBO, etc might genuinely have a higher chance of enduring under Netflix. We shall see, though...
For instance, one of my good friends is a high-up in Warner Bros theatrical marketing. She's been there since The Dark Knight days and recently ran the marketing campaigns for both Barbie and Superman. If Paramount buys WB, her job almost assuredly goes away. Yes, Paramount will still release Warner Bros movies, but it'll be the Paramount marketing team who's marketing them all. Now, translate that across basically every single film/theatrical division. Sure, some WB folks would make the cut, and maybe my friend would as well. One would assume that Paramount going from marketing 12-15 movies a year to 24-30 movies a year would require a larger marketing team than they have now. But Ellison has already said that *most* WB folks will lose their jobs, and has implied that Paramount will basically handle all production/post-production/marketing/etc duties for both studios.
Whereas, if Netflix buys WB, my friend's job almost assuredly remains intact, as does the jobs of every other WB theatrical division, as does the Warner Bros studio lot, etc, seeing as Netflix doesn't own a studio. As Ted Sarandos has publicly stated multiple times now, they're basically going to let WB keep operating as usual, making their 12-15 theatrical movies a year, then integrating that production/content with that of Netflix. Granted, yes, there's the whole theatrical window issue with Netflix, but even on that I'm starting to believe Sarandos when he says they're not going to **** with WB theatrical windows for at least the foreseeable future.
So, yeah.
I still think Paramount comes back with a higher bid, that this is about nothing other than money, and that it's all far from over. But overall, the more I've learned, the less I'm against Netflix winning, at least compared to a few weeks ago. And to be clear it has nothing to do with politics or anything like that. I really do think that the "spirit" of Warner Bros, HBO, etc might genuinely have a higher chance of enduring under Netflix. We shall see, though...
Netflix confirms they will keep WB pictures & Netflix seperate and operate them independently with the current teams that run them!
— Everything_DCU (@EverythingDCU_) December 17, 2025
James Gunn and Peter Safran will remain head of DC STUDIOS! pic.twitter.com/QDdObjxN0X
I really do appreciate your insight on this board, and value your opinion, but the following sentence from your post, has always been, and still is, one of my primary concerns with Netflix taking over WB....
In corporate lingo, that's like 1, maybe 2 years at most.
Quote:
there's the whole theatrical window issue with Netflix, but even on that I'm starting to believe Sarandos when he says they're not going to **** with WB theatrical windows for at least the foreseeable future.
In corporate lingo, that's like 1, maybe 2 years at most.
And yeah, companies merge and inevitably cut out the duplicate functions, etc. Happens all the time. It would be nothing new if/when Paramount did it. But would it affect the quality and business model of the new WB/Paramount company? Maybe, who knows.
But I just feel like Netflix taking over WB gives us like an 80% chance of the quality and whole movie-release business model declining. And I'm going off nothing more than my gut. Soooo....take my opinion with a grain of salt. And for the record there have been a few Netflix produced movies I've liked. A few.
But I just feel like Netflix taking over WB gives us like an 80% chance of the quality and whole movie-release business model declining. And I'm going off nothing more than my gut. Soooo....take my opinion with a grain of salt. And for the record there have been a few Netflix produced movies I've liked. A few.
I'm genuinely not worried about quality being an issue. Netflix has said numerous times now that the various WB divisions/teams/leadership will all remain intact. And WB has been on such a heater this year in terms of movies, quality-wise, that Netflix isn't going to mess with that. At least not anytime soon. That, and there's not a chance in hell they mess with HBO, especially. The brand is too prestigious, too sacred. If anything, I think WB and HBO - meaning the execs, creatives, development practices, production, etc - could actually rub off on Netflix for the better. Maybe Netflix finally sees how to do this **** right, and a rising tide lifts all boats.
That said, I do agree that the theatrical window issue is a legit one. As of now, though, Sarandos really is making it sound like they're buying a brand new distribution model (full theatrical windows 12-15 times a year), and that they're going to fully embrace that model. Granted, does he have to say that? Yes. Will that likely change in a couple years? Probably so. Which would be terrible.
But the fact of the matter is that we're choosing between two ****ty options here. There is no good option. Damage is going to be done either way, it's just which one does the least amount. And right now? I'm leaning slightly in favor Netflix. But that could change tomorrow.
That said, I do agree that the theatrical window issue is a legit one. As of now, though, Sarandos really is making it sound like they're buying a brand new distribution model (full theatrical windows 12-15 times a year), and that they're going to fully embrace that model. Granted, does he have to say that? Yes. Will that likely change in a couple years? Probably so. Which would be terrible.
But the fact of the matter is that we're choosing between two ****ty options here. There is no good option. Damage is going to be done either way, it's just which one does the least amount. And right now? I'm leaning slightly in favor Netflix. But that could change tomorrow.
I admit, this is finally starting to feel like it's actually going to happen...
As the future of the studio hangs in the balance, Warner Bros. Discovery and Netflix leaders put on a show of force Wednesday afternoon when Netflix brass paid a visit to the Warner Bros. lot in Burbank, where WBD chief executive David Zaslav gave them a guided tour.… pic.twitter.com/Dg07ReFBc8
— Variety (@Variety) December 18, 2025
Netflix has launched a website to promote the Warner Bros.-Netflix merger to WBD's shareholders. Notably says "We plan to continue operating [Netflix and Warner Bros.] independently — with the teams that currently run them." https://t.co/XaK83mg6r1
— Animation on HBO Max (@AnimationOnMax) December 17, 2025
I hear you, and I truly do hope that all of my fears are for naught.
Every merger or takeover ever (in business) says that they are not going to change anything and will operate as separate entities.
Right up until they merge and then start to see the savings by merging or conversely the waste of duplication.
They know this anyway, it's just what they say to quell peoples fears.
I just don't ****ing believe Netflix whatsoever. They may pay lip service for 5 maybe even 10 years but WB WILL be folded in and theaters will be told to go **** themselves
I am not accusing this of anyone here. It is more the wider internet and left leaning circles. They are so relieved it wasn't Ellison that they don't realize they are getting a poisoned pill that will lead to a death of theaters and WB driven by production by algorithm. Stranger things is the outlier, HBO will be donezo and we will likely not see anything of the quality that HBO is known for after about five years once the pre merger stuff is created
TC I hope they do rub off on them but I am just too jaded to believe it
I am not accusing this of anyone here. It is more the wider internet and left leaning circles. They are so relieved it wasn't Ellison that they don't realize they are getting a poisoned pill that will lead to a death of theaters and WB driven by production by algorithm. Stranger things is the outlier, HBO will be donezo and we will likely not see anything of the quality that HBO is known for after about five years once the pre merger stuff is created
TC I hope they do rub off on them but I am just too jaded to believe it
FL_Ag1998 said:
But I just feel like Netflix taking over WB gives us like an 80% chance of the quality and whole movie-release business model declining.
I think the movie-release business model declining is a separate issue from whatever Netflix decides to do with WB produced films. WB can churn out 40 movies and its not going to make people flock back to the theaters. I think the theater watching experience is on its way out with the exception of big budget popcorn flicks where the sound and big screen improve the watching experience. I don't need to see a knives out sequel on a big screen and I am more than willing to wait for it to come to a streaming option if there is a theater exclusivity window.
I heard this on the Campea show and I can't unsee itTCTTS said:Netflix has launched a website to promote the Warner Bros.-Netflix merger to WBD's shareholders. Notably says "We plan to continue operating [Netflix and Warner Bros.] independently — with the teams that currently run them." https://t.co/XaK83mg6r1
— Animation on HBO Max (@AnimationOnMax) December 17, 2025
The two logos make it look like NO with the WB shield being the O
veryfuller
Joined:
Jul 2, 2018
Posts:
811
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
AG
WB is the only studio consistently turning out movies that people are going to see in theaters, though. This is why I'm troubled by the Netflix deal. Sure Disney pops off some bangers 2-3 times per year, but WB had 1-2 movies per month that were financially successful and brought people into theaters. And their slate continues to be the most interesting moving forward. If you shorten those windows or put those movies on streaming, then theaters won't be able to stay open just to show 1-2 big summer movies and 1 big Christmas release from Disney + whatever horror movies Lionsgate markets the hell out of.
And I just don't believe Netlfix at all and am shocked that people are actually taking their word for it. Paramount has an incentive to keep movies in theaters -- because they make money that way too and seem to want to continue to do that. Netflix has zero incentive and has shown they don't care about that at all.
And I just don't believe Netlfix at all and am shocked that people are actually taking their word for it. Paramount has an incentive to keep movies in theaters -- because they make money that way too and seem to want to continue to do that. Netflix has zero incentive and has shown they don't care about that at all.
Universal would like a word.Quote:
WB is the only studio consistently turning out movies that people are going to see in theaters, though.
veryfuller
Joined:
Jul 2, 2018
Posts:
811
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
AG
Fair.
Quote:
Paramount says they will keep WB operating as a separate studio but at some point when its time to cut something to help with ROI someone will ask "why do we own 2 giant studios that essentially do the same thing." There will be downsizing when its time to make the giant cuts.
Considering the history of these big media M&As this is inevitable. And both buyers are saying they will keep WB independent. I'll call b.s. just like this comment did. We've seen this movie a countless number of times in media mergers and throughout corporate America over and over again:
- Company A wants to grow so they go buy Company B.
- [a few years go by]
- Company A (or maybe Company B's culture and staff won out in original merger) realizes "Damn we are way too big and operating outside of our core strategy. We need to shed assets to save money and get back to our strategic mission."
- Company A puts Company B up for sale.
- Rinse and repeat.
veryfuller said:
WB is the only studio consistently turning out movies that people are going to see in theaters, though. This is why I'm troubled by the Netflix deal. Sure Disney pops off some bangers 2-3 times per year, but WB had 1-2 movies per month that were financially successful and brought people into theaters. And their slate continues to be the most interesting moving forward. If you shorten those windows or put those movies on streaming, then theaters won't be able to stay open just to show 1-2 big summer movies and 1 big Christmas release from Disney + whatever horror movies Lionsgate markets the hell out of.
And I just don't believe Netlfix at all and am shocked that people are actually taking their word for it. Paramount has an incentive to keep movies in theaters -- because they make money that way too and seem to want to continue to do that. Netflix has zero incentive and has shown they don't care about that at all.
If the theatrical releases from WB are making money, I don't see why Netflix would kill that off. Granted dumber decisions have been made before. The alternative is to make them Netflix streaming exclusives. I don't see the jump in subscriber numbers to see these exclusives being enough additional revenue to offset a theatrical release. For all of these companies with a streaming app, they have been struggling to find a balance between providing content to get people to sign up/stay signed up and those numbers matching the cost of that content. I would think in Netflix's case, since they are basically the OG of the streamers they have the largest market share and for them to make additional revenue is to release movies in theaters. Perhaps I'm being too optimistic.
Rigs said:
WBD doesn't like that the Paramount money is not fully Ellison money. Like $40B of it comes from some Middle East funds that no one really knows what they are.
I saw a comment today that was interesting. Larry Ellison's net worth has been cut in half due to Oracle's stock crashing 45% in the past few months. He might not be too happy to fund a large acquisition like this given the circumstamces.
In a phone call hours before Netflix sealed the deal for Warner Bros. on Dec. 4, Ted Sarandos played hardball with David Zaslav: Sign a deal for Netflix to buy Warners today, or we’re pulling out of the bidding. https://t.co/GZ1lfHlXlS
— The Hollywood Reporter (@THR) December 19, 2025
Really good/interesting interview, re: Paramount's side of the deal. Answers a lot of technical/deal point questions while Cardinale is pretty incredulous as to why WB isn't currently engaging with them. Granted, at the end of the day it's all posturing and public negotiating, but a good listen nonetheless…
New pod: Paramount fights back! Dealmaker/investor Gerry Cardinale goes public with plans to win Warners from Netflix, why Larry didn’t put in more money, middle-east politics, and why WBD really rejected the Ellisons. Listen! https://t.co/lbtY5g3l1y
— Matthew Belloni (@MattBelloni) December 18, 2025
#WBD's fifth largest shareholder says the #Netflix deal is “superior on deal terms” but “comparable on value,” calling on #Paramount to revise its $108.4 billion bid for the media giant.
— TheWrap (@TheWrap) December 19, 2025
Keep up with the drama: https://t.co/SCEXDKCZMc
📸 Patrick T. Fallon / AFP via Getty Images pic.twitter.com/Wjpwo1GEEj
Ellison ponies up a guarantee on the cash.
Netflix is gonna have to up, or that's now the superior deal.
Netflix is gonna have to up, or that's now the superior deal.
Fascinating when the egos take over. I think it's stupid that Larry Ellison is doing that, but what do I know other than the family will be right back here in less than 10 years trying to sell it off and likely for cheaper than what they paid.
Did CBS shelf their 60 minutes story on CECOT last night because they need to stay on Trump's good side?
They don't NEED to. They just WANT to now.
Zombie Jon Snow said:
Every merger or takeover ever (in business) says that they are not going to change anything and will operate as separate entities.
Right up until they merge and then start to see the savings by merging or conversely the waste of duplication.
They know this anyway, it's just what they say to quell peoples fears.
This is all so eerily similar to my own company. A few years ago, there were three major players in the industry. The #2 and #3 players decided to merge to better take on #1. Outside of some dead wood, pretty much everything had to remain intact to meet that challenge.
Here is it several years later, that that challenge was not really met. On top of that the industry is contracting. In the midst of this, we are now being bought out by #1. This isn't about growing the business, it's about getting rid of a competitor.
It's going to be a bloodbath.
Thurman Merman
Taylor Hamm more rational than a lot of you right now
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
6
gigemJTH12
3 weeks to prepare, yet no new creativity or at least a contingency plan on offense?
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
6
JW
3 weeks to prepare, yet no new creativity or at least a contingency plan on offense?
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
6
txaggie2012
Taylor Hamm more rational than a lot of you right now
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
5
gigemJTH12
3 weeks to prepare, yet no new creativity or at least a contingency plan on offense?
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
5