Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Disney, Warner, Comcast, and Paramount are contemplating cuts, possible mergers.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Disney, Warner, Comcast, and Paramount are contemplating cuts, possible mergers.

    https://arstechnica.com/culture/2023...top-5-billion/

    The world’s largest traditional entertainment companies face a reckoning in 2024 after losing more than $5 billion in the past year from the streaming services they built to compete with Netflix.

    Disney, Warner Bros Discovery, Comcast and Paramount—US entertainment conglomerates that have been growing ever larger for decades—are facing pressure to shrink or sell legacy businesses, scale back production and slash costs following billions in losses from their digital platforms.

    Shari Redstone, Paramount’s billionaire controlling shareholder, has effectively put the company on the block in recent weeks. She has held talks about selling the Hollywood studio to Skydance, the production company behind Top Gun: Maverick, people familiar with the matter say.

    Paramount chief executive Bob Bakish also discussed a possible combination over lunch with Warner CEO David Zaslav in mid-December. In both cases the discussions were said to be at an early stage and people familiar with the talks cautioned that a deal might not materialize.

    Beyond their streaming losses, the traditional media groups are facing a weak advertising market, declining television revenues and higher production costs following the Hollywood strikes.

    Rich Greenfield, an analyst at LightShed Partners, said Paramount’s deal discussions were a reflection of the “complete and utter panic” in the industry.

    “TV advertising is falling far short, cord-cutting is continuing to accelerate, sports costs are going up and the movie business is not performing,” he said. “Everything is going wrong that can go wrong. The only thing [the companies] know how to do to survive is try to merge and cut costs.”

    But as the traditional media owners struggle, Netflix, the tech group that pioneered the streaming model over a decade ago, has emerged as the winner of the battle to reshape video distribution.

    “For much of the past four years, the entertainment industry spent money like drunken sailors to fight the first salvos of the streaming wars,” analyst Michael Nathanson wrote in November. “Now, we are finally starting to feel the hangover and the weight of the unpaid bar bill.”

    For companies that have been trying to compete with Netflix, Nathanson added, “the shakeout has begun.”

    After a bumpy 2022, Netflix has set itself apart from rivals—most notably by being profitable. Earnings for its most recent quarter soared past Wall Street’s expectations as it added 9 million new subscribers—the strongest rise since early 2020, when Covid-19 lockdowns led to a jump.

    “Netflix has pulled away,” says John Martin, co-founder of Pugilist Capital and former chief executive of Turner Broadcasting. For its rivals, he said, the question is “how do you create a viable streaming service with a viable business model? Because they’re not working.”

    The leading streaming services aggressively raised prices in 2023. Now, analysts, investors and executives predict that consolidation could be ahead next year as some of the smaller services combine or bow out of the streaming wars.

    Warner, home to HBO and the Warner Bros movie studio, has made a small profit at its US streaming services this year, in part by raising prices, aggressively culling some series and licensing others to Netflix. However, this has come at a price: Warner lost more than 2 million streaming subscribers in its two most recent quarters.

    The company, which merged with rival Discovery last year, has long been rumored as a potential takeover candidate, with Comcast seen as the most likely buyer. But Zaslav in November hinted that his group wanted to be an acquirer instead of a target.

    “There are a lot of . . . excess players in the market. So, this will give us a chance not only to fight to grow in the next year, but to have the kind of balance sheet and the kind of stability . . . that we could be really opportunistic over the next 12 to 24 months,” he said on an earnings call.

    The terms of the Warner-Discovery merger barred the group from dealmaking for two years. That period expires on April 8.

    Disney, the largest traditional media company, is in the midst of a gutting restructuring that has featured 7,000 job cuts and attacks from activist investors. It lost more than $1.6 billion from its streaming businesses in the first nine months of 2023, during which its Disney+ service gained 8 million subscribers. The company says it will turn a profit in streaming in late 2024.

    Bob Iger, Disney chief executive, this year openly pondered whether some of its assets still fit within the company, prompting speculation that he was considering disposals. But no deals emerged, leading some investors to conclude there is little appetite among private equity or tech companies for acquiring legacy businesses.

    Paramount’s shares have risen almost 40 percent since early November as sale speculation mounted. The stock rose sharply after the Skydance talks were reported, but both Paramount and Warner shares fell after news of their discussions came to light.

    Analysts said the two companies’ high debt levels were an immediate concern for investors. “We suspect investors will focus on pro forma leverage above all else,” Citi analysts wrote in a note last week. They estimated that an all-stock combination of Warner and Paramount could yield at least $1 billion of synergies.

    But Greenfield said merging two companies with lossmaking streaming services and large portfolios of declining television assets was not the answer to their problems.

    “The right answer should be, let’s stop trying to be in the streaming business,” he said. “The answer is, let’s get smaller and focused and stop trying to be a huge company. Let’s dramatically shrink.”​

  • #2
    I cannot understand why that bonehead Rich Greenfield is still getting eyeballs. He's been around forever and is constantly making predictions that never come true.

    Comment


    • #3
      One thing is certain: the home video side of the movie industry is a mess and the theatrical side is not much better. The movie studios and their media company bosses have come pretty close to killing the golden goose.

      These greedy douchebags just couldn't accept the natural order of things -allowing one movie to have a sell-able shelf life upwards of 2 years or more. We used to have a theatrical release window that lasted at least several months. Then there was a home video retail sales/rental window that lasted at least a couple or more months. After that the movie would appear on premium cable channels. Later it would arrive on basic cable channels. Meanwhile the retail discs would get discounted a couple or so times. The movie would stay visible to the general public through all those stages.

      What have the movie studios done? They radically sped up the time line, hoping to get all the same revenue (if not more) within a shorter amount of time -basically gaming cash flow. What they're ending up with now is less money.

      They let the streaming business pretty much ruin the physical retail disc market. The studios started cutting way down on the amount of content and effort they put into physical movie disc products, putting more marketing emphasis on streaming services. The movie studios probably didn't care about brick and mortar video rental stores and music-movies-books retail stores disappearing. But the loss of those stores killed off a physical advertising platform for their movies. The user interface of some streaming app is a terrible substitute for a store filled with posters, stand-ees, end-caps, etc.

      No one wants to subscribe to 10 different movie/TV streaming services. All of these different "walled gardens" are making it very easy for movies released just a few months ago to be instantly forgotten.

      The recent WGA and SAG strikes allowed the general public to learn one truth: life still goes on if there isn't a bunch of new movies and TV shows being released. It is possible to live without those things.​

      Comment


      • #4
        Well, and nobody cares anymore if they miss something. They can either catch it later, or just watch something else from the millions of possibilities. That's why the "special event"-ness of a good movie theater experience is something that people should want to have. Make it something they can't get at home. Too bad so many chains are forgetting that and allowing their presentations or venues to go to shit.

        Comment


        • #5
          I think the executive leadership at big theater chains has been infected with the kind of business ideology popular in private equity firms. These guys could look at a theater delivering a great movie-going experience and good customer service and only see "wasteful spending" and opportunities to create "efficiencies" and thus more profit. They make all their cuts and turn the experience into something no more special than visiting a fast food restaurant in a bad part of town. But they still expect all the same customer traffic as before.

          Instant gratification has also done a lot to cheapen the value of movies and entertainment in general. Almost any of it can be pulled up on a TV, computer or mobile device now. People still have only a limited amount of time to spend watching movies or TV shows. So, yeah, if they miss one particular movie they still have many others to watch if they want to do so.

          Comment


          • #6
            Bobby, It appears that's exactly what has hapened. Remember how bad of financial trouble AMC was in near the end of COVOD? They didn't think the chain would survive... Then, miracously, they were doing great? Some entity either injected money or bought a lot of it up. That kind of pissed me off because I thought tje worst theater chain in existance would be gone. Anyway, they still exist, and they are worse than they ever have been.

            Comment


            • #7
              AMC got saved temporarily because of that "meme stock" fad. The stock price soared to a peak of $230 per share in June, 2021. It was trading at $9 per share in the beginning of the year. In one respect I kind of liked what these amateur investors did because they royally ass-raped these vulture institutional firms that short-sell companies to death. The hoards of unwashed from Reddit gave the big trading firms a heaping dose of their own medicine.

              Today, AMC's stock is back in the toilet, trading at around $5 per share currently.​

              Comment


              • #8
                "I think the executive leadership at big theater chains has been infected with the kind of business ideology popular in private equity firms."

                One of the problems is that most of the executive leadership at major theatre chains are individuals with ZERO movie theatre experience. Somewhere back there they started installing people with financial backgrounds. Literally the bean counters have taken over more of the executive positions in our industry and have never worked at a movie theatre a day in their life.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I completely agree Dennis! They are more concerned about the land value under the building than putting on a decent show.

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X