182
It’s Official: Netflix to Acquire Warner Bros. in Deal Valued at $82.7 Billion (www.hollywoodreporter.com)
submitted 2 days ago by TheImpressiveX@piefed.social to c/movies@piefed.social
52 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] SomeRandomNoob@discuss.tchncs.de 24 points 2 days ago

Netflix has 300 million subscribers. Buying WB for $80 Billions means every subscriber has to pay at least ~266$ for Netflix to break even. That's about $4.50 per month per subscriber if you spread it out over 5 years. Get ready for for some price hikes.

[-] x00z@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

WB is also generating money. So that's not completely true.

They'll probably make some double pack for a discounted price.

[-] TonyTonyChopper@mander.xyz 4 points 1 day ago

They can also raise prices for HBO

[-] SomeRandomNoob@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

True. after a quick search the WB side has ~130 million subsribers. Taking them into account it would be ~ $3 per month instead of the $4.50.

[-] Bakkoda@sh.itjust.works 15 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

"Netflix says the buy would give users more choice"

In a world with real journalism the very next question would be how but we just spread the normalization and allow the little lies.

[-] SantasMagicalComfort@piefed.world 87 points 2 days ago

If Netflix has this much money then I feel less bad about pirating their content for years now.

[-] IWW4@lemmy.zip 24 points 2 days ago

This will all be financed

[-] SantasMagicalComfort@piefed.world 6 points 2 days ago

It typically costs more money to finance something.

[-] UnspecificGravity@piefed.social 14 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Only for normal people. If you are rich or a company like this you can leverage assets for a rate lower than the rate of return on your investments and come out ahead by financing over paying cash. Rich people don't pay cash for anything.

[-] IWW4@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

The people buying it don’t give a fuck.. it will be repaid by the company they are buying

[-] yakko@feddit.uk 7 points 2 days ago

Shareholders foot the bill, ultimately.

[-] SantasMagicalComfort@piefed.world 4 points 2 days ago

Not the subscribers but the shareholders?

I'll never understand economics.

[-] pankuleczkapl@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 2 days ago

Well, in fact it's not that complicated - shareholders literally own the company - and this ownership results in both the right to decide what happens to the company and receiving dividends, which are supposed to come from the company's surplus funds. In reality it's not that straightforward, but that's the general idea. So if a company spends money, you can think of it as spending shareholders' money allocated in the company's assets.

[-] SantasMagicalComfort@piefed.world 5 points 2 days ago

Well, in fact it's not that complicated

In reality it's not that straightforward

Well now I’m really fucking confused.

[-] pankuleczkapl@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 day ago

Sorry, I meant the whole idea is simple, but in reality capitalists exploit every single loophole to gain even more money, so there are laws against a lot of stuff - it would be that simple if people were trustworthy.

[-] The_v@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

Originally shareholders received a part share in the total profitability of the company. A dividend was the main source of income from investing.

It didn't take them long to figure out that buying and selling shares of a company to other investors was usually more profitable than dividends. Its a hell of a lot easier to lie about potential value of the company than it's current reality.

So for the past 100+ years the market value of the shares are often separated from the reality of the company. The value of the shares only exists because people or automated programs are willing to pay the amount. This is how companies who are operating under a huge deficits have increasing stock prices.

Since the value of the shares can be so easily manipulated, market manipulation is the normal way investors make money today. It also means that major stockholders don't give a fuck about long term value of the company, the employees, or the damage to society & the environment they cause. They only care about making quickest profits, then passing the dumpster fire they created onto somebody else.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Blackmist@feddit.uk 12 points 2 days ago

They've clearly got too much (fucking wrestling?), but somehow not enough for anything I want to watch.

[-] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 3 points 2 days ago

Reality shows slop, wrestling is basically that, sinc eits not true "wrestling" is where the money is at.

[-] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 4 points 2 days ago

them cancelling shows should be the reason.

[-] cloudless@piefed.social 75 points 2 days ago

Get ready for Ultra Premium™️ subscription price hikes.

[-] Fermion@mander.xyz 54 points 2 days ago

Someone has to pay for that acquisition, and it won't be the shareholders.

[-] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 4 points 2 days ago

subscription. they are probably going to either force a bundling package, or increase the price of netflix to compensate.

[-] anomnom@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 days ago

Usually its debt in the new company with these scumbags.

[-] Deceptichum@quokk.au 27 points 2 days ago

I'm ready to pirate.

I already am, but I'm still ready as well.

[-] kratoz29@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 days ago

But just don't pirate, also share!

I seed, lend my Plex server and keep seeding while lending lol.

[-] turdburglar@piefed.social 2 points 2 days ago

thank you, mitch.

[-] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 4 points 2 days ago

they will justify the merger, the money they spent on it by increasing the price. since they already removed phone casting, it be funny what stuff they cook up to restrict more access to more than one person.

[-] bonenode@piefed.social 51 points 2 days ago

I am not sure that's what anyone wanted when they said there are too many different streaming services.

[-] NanoooK@sh.itjust.works 23 points 2 days ago

That's bad, HBO won't make new quality show.

[-] JoMiran@lemmy.ml 25 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

This is the best possible outcome out of a very shitty list. They haf to sell, Disney already owns too much, Jeff Bezos would monetize it in the worst possible ways, and Larry Ellison is the most evil billionaire in the US. Yes, much worse than Elon, Zuck, Bezos, etc.

EDIT: Unfortunately Larry Ellison could still buy the global division which includes CNN. Netflix is only buying the studios and streaming. Still no idea what happens to DC Comics but I think it goes with global?

[-] SubArcticTundra@lemmy.ml 14 points 2 days ago

How many more acquisitions before it's all just one entertainment company?

[-] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 3 points 2 days ago

ellison definitely wants control of CNN, he needs to turn it into a fox-lite.

[-] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 1 points 1 day ago

He's already doing that with CBS News, minus the "-lite." We are going to see full-on MAGA media propaganda on a national broadcast channel from now on, not just in the news, but in their programming.

TV programming is already very conservative, with all their Copaganda. Now it's going to get much, much worse.

[-] Nusm@peachpie.theatl.social 20 points 2 days ago

Price increase coming in 3… 2… 1…

[-] Mjpasta710@midwest.social 1 points 1 day ago

I can't wait for K-Pop Demon Hunters the ride at your nearest 6 flags..?

[-] limonfiesta@lemmy.world 18 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

This is actually worse than even Paramount aquiring them.

Both were shit, but this is hands down the worst possible outcome.

[-] golli@sopuli.xyz 13 points 2 days ago

Is it? Paramount+Larry Ellison+the Saudis was not a particular great alternative either. I guess only time will tell, how this turns out.

With Paramount I think there would have been the risk of WB remaining in a similar form, but being ideologically twisted.

With Netflix or course there is a larger risk towards theatrical and physical releases as it goes against their primary business model. And the biggest threat to creativity is not ideology, but in a way the opposite. Lack thereof and instead focus on just metrics like short term viewership numbers.

The best option out of the bad ones would have probably been something like Comcast. Or in my dreams wb would have just stayed independent, splitting of linear assets. They have a ton of debt, but imo eventually they'd have been strong enough to survive. Bur I guess sadly this wasn't the most lucrative path.

[-] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

with NUTREK being so poorly made as it is, paramount/ellison might finally either try to astroturf it or shut down the franchise. isnt physical release where all the pirating is sourced from, or at least most of them.

[-] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 4 points 2 days ago

i see them dumping every new show after 1-2 seasons. only keeping the ones that gives the most subscription sign ups.

[-] flamiera@kbin.melroy.org 10 points 2 days ago

"More choice"?

You mean, nearly all of the properties WB helped run into the ground? That's not really much of more choice.

[-] SereneSadie@quokk.au 2 points 2 days ago

Zaslav you shitbag.

[-] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 1 points 1 day ago

as soon as he allowed Malone initially to take over cnn, he was over.

[-] Muffi@programming.dev 1 points 1 day ago

I was really hoping for HBO to be the ones to tackle a Stormlight Archive adaptation. I no longer do.

[-] janewaydidnothingwrong@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

That is my nightmare. There isnt a single fantasy book series to television adaptation that hasnt been absolutely horrible. Dont ruin my cosmere stuff please

[-] stretch2m@infosec.pub 1 points 2 days ago

Shiver me timbers! Netflix is the last streaming service I've kept, because it (so far) hasn't started showing me ads. I REFUSE TO PAY FOR ADS! Also, when they jack up the price from this merger, I'm out.

[-] scala@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 day ago

They have jacked the price multiple times over the past 5 years. It used to be $9.99 without ads. Now it's $18.99. with ads it's $8

[-] SlartyBartFast@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 days ago

I thought Disney already did that

[-] Blackmist@feddit.uk 5 points 2 days ago

Maybe it's like The Producers and they're just selling it to everyone.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 05 Dec 2025
182 points (100.0% liked)

movies

2216 readers
280 users here now

A community about movies and cinema.

Related communities:

Rules

  1. Be civil
  2. No discrimination or prejudice of any kind
  3. Do not spam
  4. Stay on topic
  5. These rules will evolve as this community grows

No posts or comments will be removed without an explanation from mods.

founded 9 months ago
MODERATORS
atomicpoet@piefed.social
BoozeOrWater@piefed.social
TheImpressiveX@piefed.social