The cynical take on the Netflix-WB deal is that Netflix's true goal is to eliminate movie theaters as a competitor for consumer leisure time. By pulling all WB films from theatrical release, it can strengthen its at-home streaming dominance and capture a larger share of audience attention.
Related Insights
High-stakes bidding for legacy media assets like Warner Bros. is driven by status-seeking among the ultra-wealthy, not a sound bet on the future of media. They are acquiring prestigious "shiny objects" from the past, while the actual attention economy has shifted to platforms like TikTok and YouTube.
An antitrust case against a Netflix-Warner Bros. merger is weak if the market is defined as all consumer 'eyeballs,' not just paid streaming. Including massive platforms like YouTube, TikTok, and Instagram, where most people spend their time, creates a landscape of intense competition, undermining monopoly claims.
Disney could create an unbeatable moat by purchasing a theater chain like AMC and offering exclusive perks to Disney+ subscribers, such as $1 tickets and private screenings. This transforms theaters into a physical extension of their digital subscription, boosting loyalty and attracting top creative talent who value the theatrical experience.
As major studios pull back from theatrical releases, a new opportunity emerges for cinemas. They can pivot from showing new blockbusters to becoming "revival houses" that program classic, niche, and cult films. This caters to audiences seeking curated, communal experiences beyond at-home streaming, as seen with the rise of anime screenings.
Netflix's bid for Warner Bros. may be a brilliant game theory play. Even if the deal is blocked by regulators, it forces its primary rival into a multi-year acquisition limbo. This distraction freezes the competitor's strategy, allowing Netflix to extend its market lead. It's a win-win for Netflix.
The acquisition isn't a traditional consumer monopoly but a monopsony, concentrating buying power. This gives a combined 'Super Netflix' leverage to dictate terms and potentially lower wages for actors, writers, and directors, shifting power from talent to the studio.
The intense bidding war for Warner Bros. Discovery is driven by unique strategic goals. Paramount seeks subscriber scale for survival, Netflix wants premium IP and sports rights, and Comcast primarily needs modern franchises like Harry Potter to fuel its profitable theme park business.
For 20 years, Netflix's identity was built on 'no ads, no live sports, and no big acquisitions.' Its recent reversal on all these fronts to maintain market dominance shows that adapting to new realities is more critical for long-term success than rigidly adhering to foundational principles.
Despite poor performance, CEO David Zaslav skillfully navigated a bidding war between Netflix and Paramount. By positioning Warner Bros. as a must-have asset in the streaming wars, he drove the acquisition price from $8 to $30 per share, securing a billionaire outcome for himself regardless of the winner.
By launching a bid for Warner Bros., Netflix CEO Ted Sarandos has ingeniously stalled the market. This move forces all other potential suitors and targets into a holding pattern, as any significant M&A activity must now wait for the outcome of this lengthy regulatory battle, giving Netflix a strategic advantage.