3 ms·
I wasn’t bowled over by the idea of Netflix ownership but a merge of Paramount and Warner seems way, way worse. In a sane political situation this would raise h
by afavour 8mo ago
I wasn’t bowled over by the idea of Netflix ownership but a merge of Paramount and Warner seems way, way worse. In a sane political situation this would raise huge antitrust concerns but… well, here we are I guess.
If it does go through I wonder if there’s a scenario where it still works out for Netflix: they could pick up assets at bargain prices when the merged studios inevitably sell and lay off everything they can.
- softwaredoug 8mo agoState AGs play a role in anti trust enforcement. So it’s not over yet.
- lapetitejort 8mo agoWhen has a state AG successfully cancelled a merger? Did any state try to prevent Microsoft and Activision's merger?
- Bender 8mo agoKroger/Albertsons Merger (2024-2025), JetBlue/Spirit Merger (2024), Visa/Plaid Merger (2021), "Capture-and-Kill" Ski Resort Acquisition (2021-2022), Hospital Mergers (Various 2024) are a few.
- softwaredoug 8mo agoIIRC these also involved the Feds. When Feds are not involved, its harder for State AGs to win. Not impossible. And they can slow things down / get concessions.
- howardYouGood 8mo ago[dead]
- ls612 8mo agoThe thing is it is less of an antitrust concern for two also-rans in an industry to merge than it is for the industry leader to buy a struggling competitor. People don’t like the politics of Paramount’s ownership but from a competition perspective this is the better outcome.
- afavour 8mo agoWe’re talking about multiple industries here. In streaming Netflix is dominant. In terms of movie production studio Netflix is the also-ran compared to Warner and Paramount. A purchase by Netflix would give them something they currently do not have. A purchase by Paramount is a much more direct merge of two competitors.
- lotsofpulp 8mo agoIf the industry is defined as one that makes entertainment, then no one is dominant. Oracle and bytedance (tiktok), Meta (instagram), Alphabet (youtube), Reddit, Video Games, and even the sports leagues are huge competitors for screen time. Even restricting the industry to professionally made videos, there is Apple, Amazon, Comcast, Disney, Netflix, Sony, and Paramount. Ignoring the small ones like A24 and Lionsgate. Having or not having Warner Bros be a separate entity seems inconsequential, considering the weight of the others.
- dangus 8mo agoMaybe this is too much of a side topic or tangent, but I think that mergers shouldn’t be legal by default once a company is a certain size, regardless of the level of competition. I understand that there is a lot of competition and that a merger at this stage probably won’t harm competition significantly. But that shaky justification can be used until suddenly there isn’t sufficient competition. This reminds me of a recent Wendover Productions video talking about antitrust waivers for airline alliances flying transatlantic flights. In recent waiver applications, the ability to compete with other airline alliance conglomerates that have received antitrust exceptions is the justifying reason for requesting an antitrust exception, and that keeps happening until the industry becomes wildly consolidated. I think our antitrust system should say, while you have a lot of competitors, and under that criteria you would be allowed to merge, but your company revenue/market cap/employee count/majority owner wealth is too high to be eligible to merge. You’re sufficiently large and prosperous, there is no need to grow your company larger through M&A. If you don’t like the business environment you are in, change your operations. You have the money to pursue your goals.
- thiht 8mo agoI guess this would qualify as a protrust operation