States Sue to Block Paramount-Warner Bros Merger, Defying DOJ (variety.com) 77
A coalition of 12 states led by California is suing to block the $111 billion Paramount Skydance-Warner Bros. merger, arguing it would reduce competition in theatrical distribution, blockbuster films, and basic cable licensing. The challenge (PDF) defies the DOJ's approval of the deal. Variety reports: The coalition, led by California Attorney General Rob Bonta, alleges that the $111 billion transaction violates the Clayton Act by lessening competition in three distinct markets: wide-release theatrical distribution, "top-grossing" theatrical distribution, and basic cable licensing. "The unlawful merger of these two entertainment behemoths would lead to higher prices, lower quality, and less content for film and television, harming movie theaters, basic cable distributors, and ultimately, audiences on every sofa and movie theater seat in the U.S.," Bonta said in a statement on Monday.
The suit argues that the combined company will control 27% of the wide-release theatrical distribution market, 30% of the submarket comprising "anticipated blockbuster films," and 27% of the basic cable bundle. The states argue that such consolidation will harm theaters and cable and satellite providers that rely on competition among distributors. Paramount and Warner Bros. are two of the five remaining legacy studios. Together, all five -- including Disney, Sony and Universal -- control 86% of theatrical distribution and 90% of blockbuster distribution, the states said. Warner Bros. and Paramount are also the second- and third-largest basic cable distributors, respectively.
[...] The states are expected to seek an injunction to block the transaction, which Paramount expects to close sometime after July 22. The 12 states in the coalition are Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, and Washington. [...] All are represented by Democratic attorneys general. "Consolidation here not only leads to higher prices -- it also leads to fewer opportunities for important stories to come to life, and fewer ways for audiences to encounter stories, ideas, and perspectives beyond their own experiences," Bonta said. "In this country, no one is above the law. With this lawsuit, California and our sister states are fighting for free and fair markets, not rigged markets. America has no kings in government or our economy."
The suit argues that the combined company will control 27% of the wide-release theatrical distribution market, 30% of the submarket comprising "anticipated blockbuster films," and 27% of the basic cable bundle. The states argue that such consolidation will harm theaters and cable and satellite providers that rely on competition among distributors. Paramount and Warner Bros. are two of the five remaining legacy studios. Together, all five -- including Disney, Sony and Universal -- control 86% of theatrical distribution and 90% of blockbuster distribution, the states said. Warner Bros. and Paramount are also the second- and third-largest basic cable distributors, respectively.
[...] The states are expected to seek an injunction to block the transaction, which Paramount expects to close sometime after July 22. The 12 states in the coalition are Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, and Washington. [...] All are represented by Democratic attorneys general. "Consolidation here not only leads to higher prices -- it also leads to fewer opportunities for important stories to come to life, and fewer ways for audiences to encounter stories, ideas, and perspectives beyond their own experiences," Bonta said. "In this country, no one is above the law. With this lawsuit, California and our sister states are fighting for free and fair markets, not rigged markets. America has no kings in government or our economy."
Let it burn (Score:2, Insightful)
I can only see this as a good thing, similar to what Microsoft did to the gaming industry: buy up a bunch of studios, do nothing with them for years, then fire everyone. Basically a money burning party. All those developers are now free to work for independent studios and do something new.
Are blockbuster films and basic cable really things worth preserving?
Re: (Score:3)
"Are blockbuster films and basic cable really things worth preserving?"
No.
Re:Let it burn (Score:5, Informative)
"Are blockbuster films and basic cable really things worth preserving?"
No.
I'd say it depends on what takes its place.
The non-Fox-News viewpoints of CNN seem to me to be worth preserving. And it's doubtful they would be if Paramount takes over Warner's portfolio, which includes CNN.
Look at what happened to CBS, in particular 60 Minutes, when the Ellisons' Skydance Media took over. One of the most venerable investigative-journalism shows in history has been run into the gutter.
Re:Let it burn (Score:5, Interesting)
1. Blockbuster films help fund other films and a lot of people like them enough to have them make money or crash and burn a ton of cash... They shouldn't succeed simply because they have a 30% marketing budget which is ridiculous because of the film's pile of money.
Yes, it makes bland stuff to appeal to the lowest common denominator and they don't have to run their business on massive bets; perhaps if people were not such gullible consumers?? FX doesn't draw people in as much...
Also, those expensive films pay a lot of people to make them although a ton of money is not going to the FX people. The bankable movie stars get too much for their brand. That is on the public... The big unspoken cost is the business managers who take massive profits while probably encouraging the hate on the stars they resent having to pay high wages to. They are also trying to replace every writer, artist, and actor with AI so they can keep all the money for themselves. Think it's bad now? Wait until they have zero push back from their interference which is the biggest reason films suck today. The formula committee and exec producer created shit that ruined everything is going to have a suck up AI following orders... not sneaking around the system to add memorable scenes to Forest Gump disobeying the bean counter's "artistic" vision.
2. Cable TV is not great and they make you buy channels you don't watch (or hate or are actively destroying the USA.) but the cable model with ads funded tons of TV shows that were good and had niche markets. Now the whole business model is shot, TV shows of the past are not possible; just some on broadcast TV or the HBO model (also might die.) Youtube shows make no money and have to beg for donations just to fund a tiny staff without stability or capacity to produce much. So now you have tons of choice and is it really cheaper?? I know people who pay as much or more now than before and they don't rave about quality improvement - plus they admit to watching a lot of old content from before "modernization."
The real problem: People are overly entertained. We are amusing ourselves to death. You shouldn't see so many videos that everything is a rehash. That said, if you pick the best of every plot or genre, we don't need any more new content if you consumed it in moderation. One thing I've noticed in decades in education is that we have far fewer people with actual hobbies. Pure consumption is not a hobby. Get a hobby and you won't have time to see all this content slop... and it was slop before AI started learning the patterns that was turning it into slop already.
Re: Let it burn (Score:2)
Re: Let it burn (Score:4, Interesting)
"These days"
They've all been engineered since Heaven's Gate bombed, and certain franchises have always been engineered. There was even a book on how to write generic blockbuster, called Save The Cat!, that became an industry bible in the early 2000s, with scripts being rejected if they didn't follow the formula, which gave a page by page description of what needed to be there.
But... complaining they're engineered is like complaining that rollercoasters are engineered. Nobody goes into a MCU or Bond or even a John Wick movie expecting some amazing piece of meaningful artistry. Hell, if they did, the number of people interested in them would reduce dramatically, because the last thing most of us want to do after writing Java for 5 days and trying to relax on a Friday evening is to think. People want fun escapism sometimes, because life right now sucks more than it's done in 30 years for most people.
"Are they worth saving?" So you're telling me that you feel that giving a group of billionaires more control over what you watch and what information you get because you don't see any cultural or entertainment value in The Beekeeper? That's your argument?
Really?
Re: Let it burn (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
WB was a company that could hit those exceptions though, or be willing to blockbuster budget movies that probably shouldn't have been, best example I can think of is Blade Runner 2049 which is a film I think is fantastic and WB put up like $160M, either through stupidity of love of the product and there was no way that was going to make it's money (and it didn't) but in retrospect we got a great piece of sci-fi out of it. After that even they had enough faith to let him make Dune which I guess paid off for
Re: (Score:2)
They are NOT bad... what measurement matters? They usually make a huge amount of money and get customers even if they lose money they still got more customers/sales than the quality film you put up against it. Marketing gets a majority of the credit in my opinion. A large portion goes to the masses and their popular taste... Yes, it's a formulaic pattern, which is bland and predictable but it also polishes up turds so they are barely tolerable for us; the outliers, while the masses eat it up like it's ju
Re: (Score:2)
If Warner is going to fail anyhow, I can't see any reason other than spite to prevent someone else from buying it. Spite is not a rational basis for decision making.
Re: (Score:2)
And be beholden to the algorithm (with hidden controls). No thanks, I think I'd rather have at least some transparency.
Re: Let it burn (Score:2)
No, but the only reason they want to buy it is CNN. Is it isnâ(TM)t especially quality anymore, but itâ(TM)s the last even slightly liberal news Outlet in America and is trusted across the world.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The games industry is dealing with a saturation problem. There are so many games, especially from indie developers, because the tools have lowered the barriers to entry so much.
Most of those games barely get noticed because there are dozens more being released every day.
It will happen to TV and movies too. I've already seen AI generated TV shows gaining traction on TikTok. People pooh-pooh it as slop, and it is, but like indie games that rely on a lot of off-the-shelf assets what matters is that people watc
Re: (Score:1)
Are blockbuster films and basic cable really things worth preserving?
You're asking the wrong question. The question is, just because you don't like it, does it mean it is worth purposefully destroying?
That's what is happening here. If you don't like cable and blockbuster movies, don't pay for them. If enough people agree with you it'll fizz out by itself due to basic economics. However your dislike doesn't mean we should allow mega monopolies to form. That kind of action is worth preventing even for things not worth preserving.
Re: (Score:2)
The industry is in a mess of transitions. Streaming has upended everything. Cable is falling apart, theaters are in trouble, and the industry needs to realign. That means some have to merge, some will fail, and new players will enter.
We don't want this to go like the airlines went. In that case, a merger was blocked to "preserv
Re: (Score:2)
Well, it wouldn't be a "mega monopoly", it would just be one of 4 major studios instead of 5.
One company suddenly increasing in size to the tune of 7 figures is not just "4 major studios instead of 5". One company is literally buying an insane size of the market along with a lot of IP.
The market is far better served letting Warner go bankrupt and having the company divided and the 4 major studios equally getting to bid for parts of the business.
We don't want this to go like the airlines went. In that case, a merger was blocked to "preserve competition", but the result was Spirit went out of business, taking a competitor out of the market anyway
The end result of this is that Spirits time slots and assets are bought by a variety of airlines. Yes that's exactly where we want to go. You're not served
What about Netflix? (Score:2)
The same characters were up in arms over Netflix buying WB.
Re:What about Netflix? (Score:5, Insightful)
At this point they see Netflix as the way lesser of 2 evils.
Re: (Score:1)
At this point they see Netflix as the way lesser of 2 evils.
Why should either evil prevail? Nether company should be able to do this purchase. In fact all mergers and acquisitions of companies of this size should be blocked period.
Re: (Score:2)
Remember when the DoJ blocked the Spirit-JetBlue merger? What happened there? Spirit went out of business, taking a competitor out of the mix anyway, and leaving a lot of people unemployed.
The Cable industry is going away, being replaced with streaming. It's a waste of time worrying about how this impacts that landscape. Film is in trouble, with theater attendance still down and streaming eating their lunch. The industry is ch
Re: (Score:2)
Why? Industries in trouble need mergers. This industry is in trouble.
On what basis?
The Cable industry is going away, being replaced with streaming.
So the industry doesn't need mergers then? Just let it go away? I'm struggling to see what point you're making, your post is inconsistent. Do we consolidate power in a monopoly or let an irrelevant industry die?
It's a waste of time worrying about how this impacts that landscape.
The cable industry has a FUCKING HUGE influence on the world, especially in America. Media are king makers. It's anything but a waste of time worrying about this. Unless that is you want every show in the future to be some variation of "Ow my balls"
Warner Brothers is struggling. They aren't likely to survive as an independent company for much longer. Which means either someone is going to buy them now, or someone is going to buy their assets when they go belly-up.
Yep, let's go with the latter. If they
Re: (Score:3)
What about Netflix? Leaving aside the fact that Paramount is obviously worse than Netflix - the former is a giant empire that owns studios, cable and broadcast TV stations, news outlets, and so on, while the latter owns a single streaming service that commissions third parties to make content for it, there's no evidence that these people would be in favor of Netflix owning WB either.
But if they were in favor, it'd be understandable. Netflix is definitely the lesser evil here, even without getting into what
Re:Translation (Score:5, Insightful)
Do you have any non-propaganda, unbiased evidence whatsoever that consolidating into fewer companies will in any way result in greater production of creative works?
Because if not, perhaps you should consider the possibility that the statement you quoted isn't actually propaganda (it's just a statement of fact).
Re: (Score:2)
sometimes I (Score:1)
Sometimes I wonder if this is all a grand conspiracy to destroy federalism and make us 50 nifty little states..
I hope so
Re: (Score:3)
Sometimes I wonder if this is all a grand conspiracy to destroy federalism and make us 50 nifty little states..
I hope so
If we shatter, I think it'll be a lot more than 50 separate entities. Because there are a lot of states where there's a HARSH divide between urban/rural, or even different regions not strictly on a city/country divide. Our government and our press have done such an amazing job of dividing us over the last forty-plus years that it's going to be near impossible to bring us back together. But if we shatter, it's gonna be a HELL of a mess. I don't look forward to the waves of repercussion it will cause us durin
Re: (Score:2)
Though it would be a bad idea all around. Rural areas still need the urban commercial hubs, and the cities won't last 3 days without food. Look at an electoral map br
Re: (Score:2)
Now all of a sudden you don't like states rights?
Re: (Score:2)
Sometimes I wonder if this is all a grand conspiracy to destroy federalism and make us 50 nifty little states..
I hope so
And Brexit worked splendidly for Britain, right?
Right...?
Re: (Score:1)
Actually, I think the federal government has accumulated too much control. I blame the direct election of Senators, but I'm not sure that's totally fair.
Re: (Score:2)
X/Tesla (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Let's see (Score:2)
That's a "No" to Netflix. And a "No" to Paramount.
The only bidder left appears to be Ow! My balls!
Re: (Score:2)
I'll make an offer right now to buy it for $1,000 with the intent to release the entire catalog into the public domain (CC0) 28 years after its creation.
Re: (Score:1)
I'm sure the shareholders will be lining up in droves to accept your offer of 1/25000 of a cent per share.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure the shareholders will be lining up in droves to accept your offer of 1/25000 of a cent per share.
In all seriousness, though, if bankruptcy is a real possibility, the idea of a public buyout of some of these old companies isn't a terrible one. Maybe even have the government buy it and make it free for U.S. citizens, but continue to make money on the property abroad. :-)
Re: (Score:2)
If I had control of the FTC I would at least do the former, on a blanket basis everywhere.
No mergers, no integration, horizontal or vertical. Go bankrupt. The assets of the company are sold and auctioned off piecemeal. The shareholders get what they get which shouldn't be much as the company is bankrupt which falls on them as much as anyone. With this they get a reward for creating an unsustainable business.
Re: (Score:2)
The company is probably going away no mat
Re: (Score:2)
Because the constant mergers and consolidation of industry has also caused thousands of job losses and suffering. The investors are really the only winners. Most of the time it's a PE form that buys up the company, runs it into the ground for short term gains and then the employees and customers are left holding the bag.
I also think it's toxic for our economy that so many businesses start up with the explicit goal of getting bought up by a larger company.
If the company is nearly worthless then you failed
Re: (Score:2)
It sounds like you're ma
Re: (Score:2)
401k's are not wiped out.
401K' s are agnostic of the status of the employer. They are not a perfect solution to retirement funds, but at least in this respect they are safer than, say, most employer funded pensions.
Re: (Score:2)
If the assets are sold at auction, considerable value is lost. If the company is sold, much of its value remains.
Again, this only affects the shareholders in this case. The employees suffer pretty much the same fate regardless and the consumers, despite what the companies say, tend to lose value when the company is acquired. Think about the mega mergers of the last 20 years, which ended up with better outcomes for consumers and/or employees long term? The shareholders are holding shares of a failing business right? So why should they be entitled to retain their full value?
401k's follow the broader market, WB going
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Let's see (Score:5, Insightful)
Its all about making sure that CNN ends up in the hands of a Trump ally who will turn it into a Fox News clone and destroy a major thorn in the side of Trump and the republicans. Anything else that might happen is secondary to that.
Re: (Score:2)
It worked for Twitter and CBS so why not here as well I guess.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think most people don't care about CNN.
But there are some very wealthy people who care very much about stopping what is being said about them on CNN. They do not want a network, they just want to silence one. Buy the business in order to fire the person offending them. Their interests are immediate.
Beyond that, the coalition putting up the money is largely Saudi Arabia -and the House of Saud would like to own a chunk of the established American media in order to shape the future narrative. Not-so-sile
Re: (Score:1)
The Netflix offer did NOT include cable properties (CNN, et al.). If it was only about getting control of CNN, Paramount could have bought it separately from Netflix buying the studios. Paramount's offer makes the most sense if the cable properties are losers and it's only the studios worth buying, in an effort to get control of CNN.
HBO is now HBO + showtime and priceing will go up (Score:2)
HBO is now HBO + showtime and priceing will go up as take the cost of both and add it together.
Re: (Score:2)
Good for them (Score:3)
I mean, I see some commenters here who clearly want all media to come from a monopoly that allows no others (can you say Ticketmaster?), all under the thumb of the tech-bro billionaires.
For you, why not just skip the step where you pay, and tell a chatbot to make a movie for you to see?
Re: (Score:2)
What prices would go up? (Score:2)
Penalties (Score:1)
https://www.inc.com/georgia-fearn/paramount-warner-bros-merger-could-soon-cost-millions-more-every-day/91373364
"Under the merger agreement, Paramountâ€(TM)s $31-per-share offer rises by 25 cents for every 90 days after September 30, accruing daily. The additional money is payable if the deal ultimately closes. If required the transaction fails because regulatory approvals are not obtained, Paramount would instead owe Warner Bros. Discovery a $7 b
Reminds me of the Palm OS devices, way back.... (Score:2)
(What the heck does a PalmPilot organizer have to do with any of this?) Well ... I remember back when they first got popular, my buddy was a software developer at the company I worked for. At lunch one day, he mentioned how he absolutely loved the Palm OS platform, simply because it had so many limitations. He said when writing for the Windows PCs, by contrast? You had so many system resources and so many options, you could pretty much code anything you could come up with. Sloppy code was a non-issue too,
Paramount says it will leave California if blocked (Score:2)
https://variety.com/2026/biz/n... [variety.com]
The State AGs should be subject to RICO (Score:1)
Also, the deal involved a bribe (Score:5, Informative)
While Paramount claims they cancelled Colbert as a cost cutting move, that makes no sense since other late night shows on other networks with smaller audiences continue. They must make some sort of financial sense.
It is widely understood, though not provable, that the move was a bribe to Trump in order to get the merger approved. Trump has had a longstanding dislike of Colbert because of his commentary on Trump as a person and as the President.
Not what it seems (Score:2)