English Entertainment
Netflix-WBD: the $82.7 billion deal has been announced, but……
MUMBAI: In a deal that would make even the most ambitious Game of Thrones plotline look tame, Netflix has agreed to acquire Warner Bros for $82.7 billion, creating an entertainment colossus that spans from Casablanca to Squid Game. If you thought streaming wars were brutal before, wait until Netflix controls Batman, Harry Potter and the Sopranos back catalogue.
The streaming behemoth will pay $27.75 per share—$23.25 in cash and the rest in stock—for the century-old studio once Warner Bros Discovery completes its messy divorce from Discovery Global, expected in the third quarter of 2026. WBD shareholders are getting a tidy equity valuation of $72 billion for their troubles, though they’ll have to wait 12-18 months to pocket the windfall whilst regulators poke around and shareholders cast their votes. Netflix is also taking on $10.7 billion of debt that Warner Bros Discovery has on its books for its studio and streaming services. If anything goes wrong, Netflix is on the hook for a whopping $5.8 billion break-up fee.
The transaction represents Netflix’s most audacious land grab yet. Forget incremental growth—this is scorched-earth conquest. The blockbuster deal brings together the streaming giant Netflix, which has upended the media industry in recent years, and the storied Warner Bros film studio, along with HBO Max, production capabilities that could churn out content faster than subscribers can say “just one more episode”, and a library stuffed with cultural touchstones.
Netflix currently commands 301.6 million subscribers globally, whilst HBO Max is the third-largest streamer with 100 million subscribers. Combined, the merged entity would dwarf Disney’s roughly 128 million subscribers by more than three times. A Bank of America analyst report framed it starkly: if Netflix acquires Warner Bros, the streaming wars are effectively over, with Netflix becoming the undisputed global powerhouse.
“Our mission has always been to entertain the world,” declared Netlfix co-chief executive Ted Sarandos, presumably whilst cackling over spreadsheets showing Harry Potter, Friends and the entire DC Universe joining his streaming empire. The acquisition bundles Warner’s crown jewels—The Sopranos, The Big Bang Theory, Game of Thrones, The Wizard of Oz—with Netflix’s own hits like Wednesday, Bridgerton, Money Heist and the mysteriously titled KPop Demon Hunters. “Together, we can give audiences more of what they love and help define the next century of storytelling,” he added, in case anyone missed the imperial ambitions on display.
Netflix’s other co-chief executive Greg Peters was equally bullish. “Warner Bros has helped define entertainment for more than a century and continues to do so with phenomenal creative executives and production capabilities,” he said. Translation: more binge-worthy content, more subscribers, more money. Netflix expects to scoop $2 billion-3 billion in annual cost savings by year three—presumably by sacking duplicative executives and merging back-office functions—and reckons the deal will boost earnings per share within two years. Wall Street will be watching those numbers like hawks circling a carcass.
The deal emerged from a weeks-long bidding war that pitted Netflix against Paramount Skydance and Comcast. Paramount, newly helmed by David Ellison, sought to acquire the entirety of Warner Bros Discovery in an all-cash deal, whilst both Netflix and Comcast submitted bids only for the studio and streaming businesses. Paramount’s offer came in closer to $27 per share, whilst Netflix’s final bid reached approximately $28 per share, ultimately clinching the victory.
The auction was anything but genteel. Paramount’s lawyers fired off furious letters questioning whether Warner Bros Discovery had abandoned a fair transaction process and embarked on a “myopic process with a predetermined outcome that favours a single bidder”. The upstart studio raised its proposed break-up fee from $2.1 billion to $5 billion in a last-ditch effort to match Netflix’s terms—to no avail.
Paramount had one trump card it hoped would tilt the scales: David Ellison’s close ties to President Trump. Ellison and his management team were perceived to have a mutually beneficial relationship with the White House, potentially giving them an advantage in getting any deal approved. But Netflix’s sheer financial heft—armed with $60.7 billion in financing from a consortium of banks including Wells Fargo, BNP and HSBC—proved insurmountable. The rest of the moolah is coming from $10.3 billion cash on hand in its books, and about $11.7 billion by way of equity.
Warner Bros Discovery president and chief executive David Zaslav is putting a brave face on selling off the studio that helped define entertainment for over a century. “Today’s announcement combines two of the greatest storytelling companies in the world,” he said, deploying the sort of corporate-speak that usually accompanies expensive goodbyes. “We will ensure people everywhere will continue to enjoy the world’s most resonant stories for generations to come,” he added, though he’ll be saying it from the boardroom of Discovery Global, the leftover bits including CNN, TNT Sports, Discovery channels across Europe, and digital products like Discovery+ and Bleacher Report.
If Netflix thought the hard part was winning the bid, it’s in for a rude awakening. Justice Department antitrust officials are likening the Netflix purchase to Ticketmaster buying Madison Square Garden—a comparison that should send shivers down any dealmaker’s spine. Senior White House officials held a meeting about 10 days ago voicing opposition to Netflix’s megadeal over concerns about excessive market power, whilst DOJ antitrust division chief Gail Slater and her senior reports have held a series of meetings discussing plans to launch a sweeping, multiyear investigation if the deal proceeds.
The political backlash is bipartisan and brutal. Senator Mike Lee, who leads the senate judiciary subcommittee on antitrust, said the bid would raise serious competition questions—perhaps more so than any transaction he’d seen in about a decade. Representative Darrell Issa cautioned that merging Netflix with HBO Max would create a company with more than a 30 per cent share of the streaming market, a threshold traditionally viewed as presumptively problematic under antitrust law. Even senators Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders and Richard Blumenthal sent a letter warning that any potential Warner Bros merger could be tainted by “political favouritism and corruption.”
Netflix has been running around Washington trying to convince everyone that their deal is fine from an antitrust standpoint, but no one is buying what they’re saying at senior levels of the White House or DOJ antitrust, is what some are whispering in the corridors. The company has reportedly hired Steven Sunshine of Skadden Arps, an antitrust attorney whose recent track record includes advising on deals that were blocked or abandoned—Visa’s attempted purchase of Plaid, Adobe’s effort to buy Figma, Sabre’s proposed acquisition of Farelogix. Not exactly a confidence-inspiring CV.
Then there’s the small matter of cinema owners, who view Netflix’s bid with all the enthusiasm of turkeys greeting Christmas. Cinema United, the world’s largest exhibition trade association representing over 30,000 movie screens, slammed the proposed acquisition as an “unprecedented threat to the global exhibition business.”
Cinema United president and chief executive Michael O’Leary warned the deal could remove about 25 per cent of the annual domestic box office, as Netflix tends to release only a handful of films in theatres.
The concerns aren’t paranoid fantasy. O’Leary pointedly noted that Netflix’s success is television, not movies on the big screen, and that sporadic, truncated theatrical releases to meet awards criteria in a handful of theatres is not a commitment to exhibition. Research suggests for each dollar spent in a local movie theatre, an additional $1.50 is spent in surrounding businesses—restaurants, bars, shopping centres, transportation. Cinema closures don’t just hurt exhibitors; they hollow out Main Street.
Netflix has attempted to mollify critics, promising to maintain Warner Bros’s current operations, “including theatrical releases for films.” On a Friday conference call, Sarandos insisted the company has no “opposition to movies in theatres,” noting Netflix released 30 films in cinemas in 2025. But most had far shorter theatrical runs than typical studio releases, and Sarandos has previously described movie theatres as “outdated”—hardly the sort of rhetoric that inspires confidence.
The Directors Guild of America, now led by Christopher Nolan (who released nine films at Warner Bros over 18 years before decamping to Universal), plans to meet with Netflix over “significant concerns.”
An anonymous consortium of A-list talent sent an open letter to Congress arguing that Netflix would “effectively hold a noose around the theatrical marketplace” by reducing output to cinemas and forcing down subsequent licensing fees. The letter was signed anonymously, the group explained, “not out of cowardice” but fear of retaliation, given Netflix’s considerable marketplace power.
The deal’s structure is byzantine even by Wall Street standards. In June, Warner Bros Discovery announced plans to split into two companies—Streaming & Studios (now being flogged to Netflix) and Global Networks (becoming Discovery Global). The separation, now expected in the third quarter of 2026, must occur before Netflix can close the acquisition. It’s corporate surgery on a grand scale, carving up a media empire assembled only three years ago when Discovery acquired WarnerMedia.
Discovery Global will inherit CNN, TNT Sports in the US, Discovery channels, free-to-air channels across Europe, and digital products like Discovery+ and Bleacher Report. Netflix cherry-picks the prestige dramas, blockbuster franchises, and HBO’s library of landmark series including The Wire, Deadwood, Sex and the City, Curb Your Enthusiasm and Six Feet Under. Warner Bros Discovery’s assets also include broad film and television rights to the Harry Potter franchise and the entire DC Studios roster—Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman and the rest of the comic book pantheon.
The stock component comes with a collar mechanism that would baffle most civilians. If Netflix shares trade between $97.91 and $119.67 (measured by 15-day volume-weighted average price three days before closing), WBD shareholders get $4.50 worth of Netflix stock per share. Below that range, they receive 0.046 Netflix shares per WBD share; above it, just 0.0376 shares. It’s financial engineering designed to protect both parties from market volatility, though one suspects the lawyers are the real winners.
It’s hard to overstate what a major pivot this deal represents for Netflix, which has made very few acquisitions in its history, preferring to grow organically. The company built its $437bn market capitalisation (dwarfing even Disney’s $190bn) on the back of subscription revenue and proprietary content. Now it’s making the biggest bet in its 28-year history that old Hollywood magic can turbocharge its streaming dominance.
The deal’s brain trust includes a who’s who of Wall Street and legal eagles. Moelis & Company and Wells Fargo advised Netflix, with Skadden Arps handling the legal heavy lifting. Warner Bros Discovery brought in Allen & Company, JP Morgan and Evercore, with Wachtell Lipton and Debevoise & Plimpton as legal counsel. The transaction was unanimously approved by both boards—though one imagines some directors required rather more convincing than others.
For consumers, Netflix is promising more choice and greater value, though whether “greater value” translates to stable subscription prices remains to be seen. The company has been steadily raising prices for years, and now it controls an even larger slice of premium content. Netflix’s ad-supported tier already boasts 94 million subscribers by May 2025, suggesting the company has successfully trained viewers to accept commercials in exchange for lower costs. The question is whether regulators will view this consolidated power as anti-competitive.
Netflix has just written Hollywood’s biggest plot twist, transforming from Silicon Valley upstart to entertainment empire in barely two decades. Whether audiences will live happily ever after—or find themselves paying ever-higher prices for the privilege of watching Batman fight the Demogorgon—remains to be seen.
The regulatory gauntlet ahead looks brutal. The DOJ is sharpening its antitrust knives, lawmakers from both parties are howling about market concentration, theatre owners are threatening fire and brimstone, and Hollywood’s creative community is circling the wagons. If this deal closes, it won’t be for lack of opposition.
But Netflix has $59 billion in committed financing, a market cap that makes it untouchable by all but a handful of companies, and 301.6 million subscribers who’ve already demonstrated they’ll pay for premium content. The streaming wars were always going to produce a victor. The question was never whether someone would win, but whether the rest of us would lose in the process.
One thing’s certain: the streaming wars just became a rout. And the credits haven’t even started rolling.
English Entertainment
The end of Freeview? Britain debates switching off aerial tv by 2034
UK: The aerial is losing its grip. As broadband becomes the default way Britons watch television, the UK is edging towards a decisive, and divisive, question: should Freeview be switched off by 2034? The issue, highlighted in reporting by The Guardian, has exposed deep fault lines over access, affordability and the future of public service broadcasting.
For nearly 25 years, Freeview has delivered free-to-air television from the BBC, ITV, Channel 4 and Channel 5 to almost every corner of the country. Even now, it remains the UK’s largest TV platform, used in more than 16m homes and on around 10m main household sets. Yet the same broadcasters that built it are now pressing for its closure within eight years.
Their case rests on a structural shift in viewing. Smart TVs, superfast broadband and the Netflix-led streaming boom have pulled audiences online. Advertising economics have followed. By 2034, the number of homes using Freeview as their main TV set is forecast to fall from a peak of almost 12m in 2012 to fewer than 2m, making digital terrestrial television, or DTT, increasingly costly to sustain.
But critics say the rush to switch off risks abandoning those least able, or least willing, to move online.
“I don’t want to be choosing apps and making new accounts,” says Lynette, 80, from Kent. “It is time-consuming and irritating trying to work out where I want to be, to remember the sequence of clicks, with hieroglyphics instead of words. If I make a mistake I have to start again.”
Lynette is among nearly 100,000 people who have signed a “save Freeview” petition launched by campaign group Silver Voices. She fears the government is about to “take [Freeview] away from me and others who either don’t like, can’t afford, or can’t use online versions”.
Official figures underline the fault lines. A report commissioned by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport estimates that by 2035, 1.8m homes will still depend on Freeview. Ofcom’s analysis shows those households are more likely to be disabled, older, living alone, female, and based in the north of England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.
Freeview is owned by the public service broadcasters through Everyone TV, which also operates Freesat and the newer streaming platform Freely. After two years of review, DCMS is expected to set out its position soon, drawing on three options proposed by Ofcom: a costly upgrade of Freeview’s ageing technology; maintaining a bare-bones service with only core PSB channels; or a full switch-off during the 2030s.
The broadcasters have rallied behind the third option. They argue that 2034 is the logical cut-off, when transmission contracts with network operator Arqiva expire. By then, they say, the cost of broadcasting to a dwindling audience will far outweigh the returns from TV advertising.
Ofcom agrees a crunch point is approaching. In July, the regulator warned of a “tipping point” within the next few years, after which it will no longer be commercially viable for broadcasters to carry the costs of DTT.
Others see risks beyond economics. Questions remain over whether internet TV can reliably deliver emergency broadcasts, such as the daily Covid updates, in the way that universally available DTT can. The UK radio industry has also warned that an internet-only future for TV could push up distribution costs and force some radio stations off air if PSBs no longer share Arqiva’s mast network.
“It is a political hot potato,” says Dennis Reed, founder of Silver Voices, who says he has “dissociated” his organisation from the government’s stakeholder forum, which he believes is “heavily biased” towards streaming.
The Future TV Taskforce, representing the PSBs, counters that moving online could “close the digital divide once and for all”. “We want to be able to plan to ensure that no one is left behind,” a spokesperson says, adding that rising DTT costs could otherwise mean cuts to programme budgets.
The numbers show the scale of the challenge. Of the 1.8m Freeview-dependent homes projected for 2035, around 1.1m are expected to have broadband but not use it for TV. The remaining 700,000 are forecast to lack a broadband connection altogether.
Veterans of the analogue switch-off, completed in 2012 after 76 years, recall similar fears of “TV blackout chaos”. Around 6 per cent of households were labelled “digital refuseniks”, yet a targeted help scheme and a national campaign, fronted by a robot called Digit Al voiced by Matt Lucas, delivered a largely smooth transition.
This time, the BBC is less keen to foot the bill. Tim Davie, the outgoing director general, has said the corporation should not fund a comparable support programme for a Freeview switch-off.
Research for Sky by Oliver & Ohlbaum suggests that with early awareness campaigns and digital inclusion measures, only about 330,000 households would ultimately need hands-on help ahead of a 2034 shutdown.
Meanwhile, viewing habits continue to fragment. Audience body Barb says 7 per cent of UK households no longer own a TV set, choosing to watch on other devices. In December, YouTube overtook the BBC’s combined channels in total UK viewing across TVs, smartphones and tablets, albeit measured at a minimum of three minutes.
That shift may accelerate. YouTube has recently blocked Barb and its partner Kantar from accessing viewing session data, limiting transparency just as online platforms consolidate power.
“When the government chose British Satellite Broadcasting as the ‘winner’ in satellite TV it was Rupert Murdoch’s Sky instead that came out on top,” says a senior TV executive quoted by The Guardian. “There already is such an outsider ready to be the winner in the transition to internet TV; it is YouTube.”
Freeview’s future now hangs on a familiar British dilemma: modernise fast and risk exclusion, or protect universality and pay the price. Either way, the aerial’s days as king of the living room look numbered.
English Entertainment
Christian Vesper steps down as Fremantle’s global film and drama CEO
LONDON: Christian Vesper is leaving Fremantle after ten years as ceo, global film and drama, ending a tenure that turned the company into an internationally recognised centre of excellence for drama and film. Since joining in 2016, Vesper expanded Fremantle’s scripted footprint, overseeing or exec producing over 80 films and series in the last five years, with the 100th slated for release in 2026.
Vesper shepherded hits including Bugonia, Pillion, Queer, Maria, The Chronology of Water, Picnic at Hanging Rock, The Luminaries, On Becoming a Guinea Fowl, and the upcoming Rachel Weisz starrer Séance on a Wet Afternoon. Festival favourites and critical darlings under his watch include Without Blood (Angelina Jolie, Salma Hayek), M. Son of the Century (Joe Wright, Luca Marinelli), Faithless (Tomas Alfredson, Frida Gustavsson), Cannes winner My Father’s Shadow, and The Listeners (Janicza Bravo, Rebecca Hall). He also set up the Fox revival of Baywatch.
Vesper forged a formidable slate of first-look and creative collaborations with global talent, including Emma Stone and Dave McCary’s Fruit Tree Production; Kristen Stewart, Dylan Meyer and Maggie McLean’s Nevermind Pictures; Pablo and Juan de Dios Larraín’s Fabula; Rachel Weisz and Polly Stokes’ Astral Projection; Edward Berger’s Nine Hours; Johan Renck and Michael Parets’ Sinestra Films; Sarah Condon’s Fair Harbour; and Richard Yee and Krishnendu Majumdar’s Me+You Productions.
Based in London, Vesper reported to Andrea Scrosati, group coo and ceo continental Europe, who will now oversee the film and drama division on an interim basis alongside the wider leadership team.
Scrosati said: “Christian’s vision has built the credibility of our drama and film slate. With him at the helm, we delivered consistent success and critical acclaim. We appreciate that he now wishes to focus on new horizons, and we all wish him well.”
Vesper said: “After 10 years, the time is right to step down. Fremantle has been a huge part of my life. I’m proud of what we’ve achieved — the 100th film this year underlines the progress made. We’ve built a dedicated, talented team, and I know they will take our film and drama business to even greater heights. Now is the perfect moment for my next adventure.”
Before Fremantle, Vesper spent 14 years at Sundance TV overseeing scripted projects and co-productions including Rectify, The Honorable Woman, The Last Panthers, Top of the Lake and Deutschland 83. He also held roles at HBO, iFilm, October Films and USA Films.
From festival acclaim to awards galore — four academy awards, two golden globes, five baftas, eight cannes winners, seven venice winners including the golden lion — Vesper leaves Fremantle’s film and drama operations in a position of strength, a legacy of ambition, vision and global impact, and a company poised for even bigger hits.
English Entertainment
Paramount extends deadline on Warner Bros. hostile bid
NEW YORK: Paramount Skydance has gone on the offensive against Warner Bros Discovery, calling its amended merger with Netflix an admission of weakness and still a bad deal.
In a sharply worded filing late on January 22, Paramount said the revised Netflix agreement “falls well short” of its own $30-per-share all-cash offer and urged WBD shareholders to vote it down at a forthcoming special meeting. The company has also extended its tender offer to February 20, buying time as it presses for regulatory clearance.
At the heart of the attack is money and certainty. Under the Netflix transaction, WBD shareholders would receive $27.75 a share in cash, assuming the group can offload $17bn of debt on to the spun-out Discovery Global business. If that assumption fails, the payout shrinks, dollar for dollar.
Paramount argues it almost certainly will fail. Based on leverage levels at Versant Media, a close peer, Discovery Global could sustain only about $5.1bn of net debt. That would push roughly $11.9bn back on to WBD’s studios and streaming arm, cutting the implied cash consideration from Netflix to about $23.20 a share.
WBD’s own advisers appear to share the scepticism. Discounted cash-flow analyses valued Discovery Global’s equity as low as $0.72 a share. Paramount has previously pegged it at between zero and 50 cents. Yet WBD is asking shareholders to approve the Netflix deal without disclosing the final capital structure of Discovery Global, despite admitting they “will not know or be able to determine” the actual merger consideration at closing.
Paramount says that rush is no accident. Once approved, the Netflix deal would shut the door on what it calls a value-maximising alternative, a $108.4bn enterprise-value transaction, all cash, with far less regulatory baggage than Netflix’s $82.7bn-equivalent proposal.
That baggage matters. Paramount warns that a Netflix-WBD tie-up would further entrench market concentration, handing Netflix an estimated 43 per cent of global subscription video-on-demand customers. Prices would rise, creators would lose leverage and cinemas would suffer, it argues. Regulators, especially in Europe where Netflix already dominates and HBO Max is its main rival, are unlikely to be persuaded by Netflix’s attempt to define the market as including YouTube, TikTok and Instagram.
By contrast, Paramount pitches its own bid as pro-competitive, bolstering theatrical output and strengthening Hollywood’s creative ecosystem.
The gloves also come off on governance. Paramount says the WBD board publicly defended the original Netflix deal even as it renegotiated it, refused to engage with Paramount once talks with Netflix reopened and continues to withhold “highly material” information while racing to a vote.
Shareholders appear to be listening. As of late on January 21, more than 168.5m WBD shares had been tendered into Paramount’s offer.
The message from Paramount is blunt. The Netflix deal is smaller, shakier and riskier. The cash is on the table, the clock is ticking and shareholders now have a choice to make.
-
iWorld3 months agoTips Music turns up the heat with Tamil party anthem Mayangiren
-
iWorld12 months agoBSNL rings in a revival with Rs 4,969 crore revenue
-
I&B Ministry3 months agoIndia steps up fight against digital piracy
-
MAM3 months agoHoABL soars high with dazzling Nagpur sebut
-
iWorld2 days agoNetflix celebrates a decade in India with Shah Rukh Khan-narrated tribute film
-
News Broadcasting6 months agoWion marks Independence Day with global showcase of India’s spirit
-
iWorld3 months agoThe Night Manager returns with new secrets, new spies and old scars
-
Brands2 months agoLuma powers up with massive 900m dollar raise
