kilik64
Carefree, wherever we may be!
- Joined
- May 21, 2021
- Messages
- 1,381
Anyone can use UE though, dont need to give Epic 1.5bn for that lol
DIS Shareholders and Stock Info ONLY
- Thread starter hhisc16
- Start date
HokieRaven5
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2020
- Messages
- 7,833
Was more talking about gaining an ownership stake in it, not a licensing use.
Fortnite still likely pays off the initial investment even as it is waning in popularity
Last edited:
wabbott
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2021
- Messages
- 6,458
https://www.wsj.com/business/media/...orts-streaming-venture-403927cf?siteid=yhoof2
WSJ News Exclusive | Former Apple Executive Among CEO Candidates for New Sports-Streaming Venture
by Jessica Toonkel and Isabella Simonetti
02/13/2024
Disney’s ESPN, Fox and Warner Bros. Discovery have begun reviewing potential CEO candidates to lead their new streaming venture, which will offer all their live-sports programming in one package.
Pete Distad, who was a top executive at Apple in charge of its video and sports businesses before leaving the tech giant last spring, is among the top candidates the companies are considering, according to people familiar with the situation. Distad earlier was a marketing and distribution executive for the streaming service Hulu.
The names of other candidates the companies are considering couldn’t be learned. They are expected to name a CEO in the coming weeks, and the as-yet-unnamed service itself is slated to launch later this year.
ESPN, Fox and Warner are looking for an executive seasoned in marketing subscription services and managing the challenges that arise in those businesses, such as customer turnover.
WSJ News Exclusive | Former Apple Executive Among CEO Candidates for New Sports-Streaming Venture
by Jessica Toonkel and Isabella Simonetti
02/13/2024
Disney’s ESPN, Fox and Warner Bros. Discovery have begun reviewing potential CEO candidates to lead their new streaming venture, which will offer all their live-sports programming in one package.
Pete Distad, who was a top executive at Apple in charge of its video and sports businesses before leaving the tech giant last spring, is among the top candidates the companies are considering, according to people familiar with the situation. Distad earlier was a marketing and distribution executive for the streaming service Hulu.
The names of other candidates the companies are considering couldn’t be learned. They are expected to name a CEO in the coming weeks, and the as-yet-unnamed service itself is slated to launch later this year.
ESPN, Fox and Warner are looking for an executive seasoned in marketing subscription services and managing the challenges that arise in those businesses, such as customer turnover.
ThornXBL
Mouseketeer
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2009
- Messages
- 255
When I go to www.ProxyVote.com/Disney , log in, and enter my control number, i see the "attend the meeting" link with info on this page:
I see what you mean though; there is no apparent registration link under "Attend Virtually".
Last edited:
wabbott
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2021
- Messages
- 6,458
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/paramount-shares-drop-7-warren-034605513.html
Paramount Shares Drop About 7% After Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway Sells 1/3 of Stake
by Ross A. Lincoln
Wed, February 14, 2024 at 9:46 PM CST
Shares of Paramount Global fell over 6% in after hours trading on Wednesday night, following news that Berkshire Hathaway sold off 1/3 of its stake in the company during the fourth fiscal quarter of 2023, which ended Dec. 31.
Berkshire Hathaway, the holding company owned by billionaire investor Warren Buffett, disclosed the sale its latest 13F filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on Wednesday.
Berkshire Hathaway got into the Paramount business in 2022 with a $2.6 billion stock buy amounting to 15% of the company, a purchase that sent Paramount stock soaring at the time. The multinational conglomerate owns roughly 63.3 million shares of Paramount following the sale.
In addition to Paramount, Berkshire reduced its stake in HP Inc. and Apple, which remains a top holding. It also exited positions in D.R. Horton, Markel Group, StoneCo Ltd. and Globe Life Inc., while adding to its Chevron Corp. and Occidental Petroleum stakes.
The news comes one day after Paramount Global, whose shares have dropped 46% in the past year, announced plans to lay off 800 employees as part of a major cost-cutting move. That amounts to about 3% of the company’s staff but it comes amid a very uncertain time for the entertainment giant, owner of CBS, Comedy Central, BET and of course the Paramount film studio, among other properties.
The timing here is likely not coincidental. Berkshire Hathaway sold off its shares during the same time period last year when Shari Redstone, who owns Paramount through her company National Amusements, began to entertain the possibility of selling it.
Indeed, in December Warner Bros. Discovery CEO David Zaslav met with Paramount Global CEO Bob Bakish to discuss a possible merger, though news of that meeting put a dent in both companies’ stock price. More recently, at the end of January Byron Allen offered $14 billion for Paramount, well above its roughly $9.1 billion market capitalization.
Even so, Bakish has more recently tamped down talk that a sale is imminent, telling CNBC last week that “our focus is on creating shareholder value, either through execution or through alternate means.”
“As to what direction we’re going to go, we’ll see,” Bakish also said. “But what it really tells you is there’s extraordinary value in Paramount Global.”
According to the SEC filing, in the Q4 sale Berkshire Hathaway unloaded 30.4 million shares. Representatives for Berkshire Hathaway didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment from TheWrap; according to the New York Post, the company plans to sell its remaining 63.3 million Paramount shares at some point soon.
The post Paramount Shares Drop About 7% After Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway Sells 1/3 of Stake appeared first on TheWrap.
Paramount Shares Drop About 7% After Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway Sells 1/3 of Stake
by Ross A. Lincoln
Wed, February 14, 2024 at 9:46 PM CST
Shares of Paramount Global fell over 6% in after hours trading on Wednesday night, following news that Berkshire Hathaway sold off 1/3 of its stake in the company during the fourth fiscal quarter of 2023, which ended Dec. 31.
Berkshire Hathaway, the holding company owned by billionaire investor Warren Buffett, disclosed the sale its latest 13F filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on Wednesday.
Berkshire Hathaway got into the Paramount business in 2022 with a $2.6 billion stock buy amounting to 15% of the company, a purchase that sent Paramount stock soaring at the time. The multinational conglomerate owns roughly 63.3 million shares of Paramount following the sale.
In addition to Paramount, Berkshire reduced its stake in HP Inc. and Apple, which remains a top holding. It also exited positions in D.R. Horton, Markel Group, StoneCo Ltd. and Globe Life Inc., while adding to its Chevron Corp. and Occidental Petroleum stakes.
The news comes one day after Paramount Global, whose shares have dropped 46% in the past year, announced plans to lay off 800 employees as part of a major cost-cutting move. That amounts to about 3% of the company’s staff but it comes amid a very uncertain time for the entertainment giant, owner of CBS, Comedy Central, BET and of course the Paramount film studio, among other properties.
The timing here is likely not coincidental. Berkshire Hathaway sold off its shares during the same time period last year when Shari Redstone, who owns Paramount through her company National Amusements, began to entertain the possibility of selling it.
Indeed, in December Warner Bros. Discovery CEO David Zaslav met with Paramount Global CEO Bob Bakish to discuss a possible merger, though news of that meeting put a dent in both companies’ stock price. More recently, at the end of January Byron Allen offered $14 billion for Paramount, well above its roughly $9.1 billion market capitalization.
Even so, Bakish has more recently tamped down talk that a sale is imminent, telling CNBC last week that “our focus is on creating shareholder value, either through execution or through alternate means.”
“As to what direction we’re going to go, we’ll see,” Bakish also said. “But what it really tells you is there’s extraordinary value in Paramount Global.”
According to the SEC filing, in the Q4 sale Berkshire Hathaway unloaded 30.4 million shares. Representatives for Berkshire Hathaway didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment from TheWrap; according to the New York Post, the company plans to sell its remaining 63.3 million Paramount shares at some point soon.
The post Paramount Shares Drop About 7% After Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway Sells 1/3 of Stake appeared first on TheWrap.
wabbott
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2021
- Messages
- 6,458
Doesn't seem to be helping the company's stock price. There ought to be money people standing in line to buy PARA, just to own CBS. But there ain't.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/12/business/media/super-bowl-ratings-record.html
Super Bowl Viewership Rose to 123.4 Million, a Record High
The figure easily exceeded last year’s 115.1 million, capping off a big year for N.F.L. ratings.
By John Koblin
Feb. 12, 2024
Sunday night’s overtime Super Bowl shattered ratings records.
An audience of 123.4 million watched the Kansas City Chiefs beat the San Francisco 49ers, according to preliminary figures from Nielsen and CBS, which broadcast the game. That figure easily eclipsed last year’s record high of 115.1 million, when Kansas City defeated the Philadelphia Eagles. Final Nielsen ratings for the Super Bowl will be issued on Tuesday.
The figure is the total who watched on CBS, the Paramount+ streaming app, the Spanish-language channel Univision, N.F.L. digital channels or Nickelodeon, which aired a child-friendly telecast. The vast majority watched the game on CBS, which recorded 120 million viewers, according to Nielsen.
The game had a lot going for it. It went into overtime, concluded with a game-winning touchdown pass (for a 25-22 final score) and featured an elite Kansas City team with a superstar quarterback, Patrick Mahomes. Travis Kelce, Kansas City’s starting tight end, also happens to be dating a megastar in Taylor Swift, who attended the game in Las Vegas.
At a moment when traditional television ratings have been in free fall, the N.F.L., particularly the Super Bowl, has stood immune to massive viewership changes affecting the rest of the media world. Thirteen of the last 15 Super Bowls have drawn more than 100 million viewers, according to Nielsen, a bigger audience than in earlier decades.
Sunday’s performance also capped off a big year for N.F.L. ratings.
Viewership was up 7 percent, according to Nielsen, falling just shy of the record set in 2015. Several playoff games set ratings records, including the A.F.C. championship game on CBS, which scored more than 55 million viewers, and an A.F.C. divisional playoff game that drew more than 50 million. The N.F.C. championship game was a little short of a record.
League officials have pointed to numerous close games this season — along with a playoff hunt that still included several teams toward the end — as big reasons that ratings jumped. (It’s less clear how much Ms. Swift helped boost viewership.)
Other live events, like some award shows, have also had good returns recently. Last week, the Grammy Awards, also on CBS, drew roughly 17 million viewers, a 34 percent jump from last year’s ceremony. Ratings for the Oscars have increased in back-to-back years.
The success of N.F.L. telecasts stands in sharp contrast to the rest of traditional television, which has had nose-diving viewership for several years as more and more viewers migrate to on-demand streaming entertainment. Viewership among the major broadcast networks has declined 12 percent since the current television season began in September.
Last year’s Hollywood writers’ and actors’ strikes mostly starved the broadcast networks of new episodes of scripted television series for the last five months, and CBS has been particularly hurt. The network’s prime-time audience has declined 30 percent since the television season began, according to Nielsen.
Help may be on the way, though. CBS is rolling out new episodes of scripted shows this week, and promotional videos for the coming lineup circulated throughout the Super Bowl telecast. The overtime game also meant additional commercial breaks, which netted CBS roughly an extra $35 million, Adweek reported. CBS had sold hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of commercial time for the game.
John Koblin covers the television industry. He is the co-author of “It’s Not TV: The Spectacular Rise, Revolution, and Future of HBO.” More about John Koblin
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/12/business/media/super-bowl-ratings-record.html
Super Bowl Viewership Rose to 123.4 Million, a Record High
The figure easily exceeded last year’s 115.1 million, capping off a big year for N.F.L. ratings.
By John Koblin
Feb. 12, 2024
Sunday night’s overtime Super Bowl shattered ratings records.
An audience of 123.4 million watched the Kansas City Chiefs beat the San Francisco 49ers, according to preliminary figures from Nielsen and CBS, which broadcast the game. That figure easily eclipsed last year’s record high of 115.1 million, when Kansas City defeated the Philadelphia Eagles. Final Nielsen ratings for the Super Bowl will be issued on Tuesday.
The figure is the total who watched on CBS, the Paramount+ streaming app, the Spanish-language channel Univision, N.F.L. digital channels or Nickelodeon, which aired a child-friendly telecast. The vast majority watched the game on CBS, which recorded 120 million viewers, according to Nielsen.
The game had a lot going for it. It went into overtime, concluded with a game-winning touchdown pass (for a 25-22 final score) and featured an elite Kansas City team with a superstar quarterback, Patrick Mahomes. Travis Kelce, Kansas City’s starting tight end, also happens to be dating a megastar in Taylor Swift, who attended the game in Las Vegas.
At a moment when traditional television ratings have been in free fall, the N.F.L., particularly the Super Bowl, has stood immune to massive viewership changes affecting the rest of the media world. Thirteen of the last 15 Super Bowls have drawn more than 100 million viewers, according to Nielsen, a bigger audience than in earlier decades.
Sunday’s performance also capped off a big year for N.F.L. ratings.
Viewership was up 7 percent, according to Nielsen, falling just shy of the record set in 2015. Several playoff games set ratings records, including the A.F.C. championship game on CBS, which scored more than 55 million viewers, and an A.F.C. divisional playoff game that drew more than 50 million. The N.F.C. championship game was a little short of a record.
League officials have pointed to numerous close games this season — along with a playoff hunt that still included several teams toward the end — as big reasons that ratings jumped. (It’s less clear how much Ms. Swift helped boost viewership.)
Other live events, like some award shows, have also had good returns recently. Last week, the Grammy Awards, also on CBS, drew roughly 17 million viewers, a 34 percent jump from last year’s ceremony. Ratings for the Oscars have increased in back-to-back years.
The success of N.F.L. telecasts stands in sharp contrast to the rest of traditional television, which has had nose-diving viewership for several years as more and more viewers migrate to on-demand streaming entertainment. Viewership among the major broadcast networks has declined 12 percent since the current television season began in September.
Last year’s Hollywood writers’ and actors’ strikes mostly starved the broadcast networks of new episodes of scripted television series for the last five months, and CBS has been particularly hurt. The network’s prime-time audience has declined 30 percent since the television season began, according to Nielsen.
Help may be on the way, though. CBS is rolling out new episodes of scripted shows this week, and promotional videos for the coming lineup circulated throughout the Super Bowl telecast. The overtime game also meant additional commercial breaks, which netted CBS roughly an extra $35 million, Adweek reported. CBS had sold hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of commercial time for the game.
John Koblin covers the television industry. He is the co-author of “It’s Not TV: The Spectacular Rise, Revolution, and Future of HBO.” More about John Koblin
wabbott
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2021
- Messages
- 6,458
https://news.bloomberglaw.com/ip-law/disney-fox-warner-streaming-deal-faces-doj-antitrust-review
Feb. 15, 2024, 12:34 PM CST
Disney-Fox-Warner Streaming Deal Faces DOJ Antitrust Review
By Leah Nylen,Todd Shields
Bloomberg News
The Justice Department plans to scrutinize the new streaming service proposed by Walt Disney Co., Fox Corp. and Warner Bros. Discovery Inc. over concerns it could harm consumers, media rivals and sports leagues.
Regulators will look at terms of the joint venture once it is finalized, according to two people familiar with the process. The companies haven’t been notified of the impending review and it may not lead to any action, said the people, who asked not to be identified discussing a confidential review.
Disney, Fox and Discovery announced the new streaming service earlier this month that would combine content from Disney’s ESPN and ABC networks, Fox, and Warner channels including TNT and TBS. Citi analysts estimated the venture would control about 55% of US sports rights by cost, or about $14.4 billion of the $26.7 billion spent in 2024.
The companies’ say they aim to draw in viewers who don’t subscribe to a pay-television bundle — and offer them sports programming available on traditional cable packages. The deal, however, has already drawn objections from smaller cable providers and at least one Internet TV service that complains it will ultimately drive up prices.
The deal “reduces the number of options” for sports leagues to sell their rights, said Steve Salop, an emeritus antitrust professor at Georgetown Law School.
The Justice Department declined to comment. Officials at the companies didn’t immediately return calls and emails seeking comment.
The new offering would let viewers watch hundreds of hours of Major League Baseball, the National Basketball League, the National Hockey League, Nascar and college basketball in one place. But only about half of the most valuable sports franchise, the National Football League, would be available on the service since Comcast Corp.’s NBC, Paramount Global Inc.’s CBS and Amazon.com Inc. have rights to certain games.
Assistant Attorney General for Antitrust Jonathan Kanter dodged a question about the new sports streaming service in a public appearance last week.
When Disney bought assets from Fox in 2018, the Justice Department agreed to allow the deal to move forward except for the assets related to sports, calling them “two of the country’s most valuable cable sports properties.”
The same year, the Justice Department lost its effort to block AT&T Inc.’s merger with Time Warner, arguing the deal would let the telecom giant threaten to withhold programming to maximize its profits. Antitrust enforcers argued that the combination of AT&T’s TV-distribution network with Time Warner’s programming would lead to higher prices for consumers. A judge rejected that argument, and an appeals court upheld his decision.
But within a few years, AT&T spun off the business to Discovery Inc. The Justice Department reviewed the deal and ultimately opted against a challenge, though antitrust enforcers warned the companies they could reopen a probe later if warranted.
The Biden administration has been particularly critical of joint ventures in some markets, breaking up a partnership between American Airlines Group Inc. and JetBlue Airways Corp. last year, according to Diana Moss, vice president and director of competition policy at the Progressive Policy Institute.
Even those who think the streaming deal will eventually be cleared think it may face a marathon review before reaching the finish line.
Paul Gallant, an analyst for Cowen & Co., said in a note to clients that regulators are likely to look at whether the joint venture would discourage Warner, Fox and Disney from bidding against each other for specific sports rights.
In previous cases, the Justice Department was reluctant to bless cable bundles between too many players, according to Salop, the Georgetown professor.
In 1983, the agency blocked a joint venture between Viacom’s Showtime and The Movie Channel, then owned by Warner and American Express Co. The partnership sought to combine two of the three leading providers of paid programming for cable subscribers and involved three of the six major Hollywood studios, which controlled between 40% and 50% of theatrical releases each year.
After the Justice Department said it would sue, Showtime and The Movie Channel revised their proposal to a straight merger that the two outside studios from the partnership. Antitrust enforcers allowed that deal to proceed.
The more than 40-year-old joint venture bid isn’t necessarily a template for how to handle a 21st Century deal featuring much more modern technology.
“We are skeptical that there is a clear antitrust case for blocking here,” Blair Levin, an analyst with New Street Research, said in a Feb. 12 note. “Still, the reactions of those hurt by the deal may ultimately lead to a government reaction, particularly to ensure that local sports remain available for free.”
Disney Chief Financial Officer Hugh Johnston on Feb. 8 told Bloomberg TV the service’s three members will continue to compete with each other for sports rights. And the companies were quick to point out the non-exclusive nature of the service.
Disney still plans to launch a streaming version of its flagship ESPN brand in about a year. It will have interactive features, including sports betting and the ability to chat with fellow fans, and will be priced below the new sports offering. Fox doesn’t have a subscription-based streaming service for sports content, and Warner Bros. Max service requires a $9.99 add-on for live sports streaming.
To contact the reporters on this story:
Leah Nylen in Washington at lnylen2@bloomberg.net;
Todd Shields in Washington at tshields3@bloomberg.net
To contact the editors responsible for this story:
Sara Forden at sforden@bloomberg.net;
Molly Schuetz at mschuetz9@bloomberg.net
Leah Nylen, Anthony Aarons
Feb. 15, 2024, 12:34 PM CST
Disney-Fox-Warner Streaming Deal Faces DOJ Antitrust Review
By Leah Nylen,Todd Shields
Bloomberg News
The Justice Department plans to scrutinize the new streaming service proposed by Walt Disney Co., Fox Corp. and Warner Bros. Discovery Inc. over concerns it could harm consumers, media rivals and sports leagues.
Regulators will look at terms of the joint venture once it is finalized, according to two people familiar with the process. The companies haven’t been notified of the impending review and it may not lead to any action, said the people, who asked not to be identified discussing a confidential review.
Disney, Fox and Discovery announced the new streaming service earlier this month that would combine content from Disney’s ESPN and ABC networks, Fox, and Warner channels including TNT and TBS. Citi analysts estimated the venture would control about 55% of US sports rights by cost, or about $14.4 billion of the $26.7 billion spent in 2024.
The companies’ say they aim to draw in viewers who don’t subscribe to a pay-television bundle — and offer them sports programming available on traditional cable packages. The deal, however, has already drawn objections from smaller cable providers and at least one Internet TV service that complains it will ultimately drive up prices.
The deal “reduces the number of options” for sports leagues to sell their rights, said Steve Salop, an emeritus antitrust professor at Georgetown Law School.
The Justice Department declined to comment. Officials at the companies didn’t immediately return calls and emails seeking comment.
The new offering would let viewers watch hundreds of hours of Major League Baseball, the National Basketball League, the National Hockey League, Nascar and college basketball in one place. But only about half of the most valuable sports franchise, the National Football League, would be available on the service since Comcast Corp.’s NBC, Paramount Global Inc.’s CBS and Amazon.com Inc. have rights to certain games.
Assistant Attorney General for Antitrust Jonathan Kanter dodged a question about the new sports streaming service in a public appearance last week.
PGA Tour
But the agency has been paying close attention to developments in both sports and media that may raise antitrust concerns. The Justice Department opened a probe into PGA Tour amid allegations the golf league was pressuring players to prevent them from defecting to Saudi-backed LIV Golf. Last month, the agency also joined an antitrust suit against the National Collegiate Athletics Association over rules restricting player transfers.When Disney bought assets from Fox in 2018, the Justice Department agreed to allow the deal to move forward except for the assets related to sports, calling them “two of the country’s most valuable cable sports properties.”
The same year, the Justice Department lost its effort to block AT&T Inc.’s merger with Time Warner, arguing the deal would let the telecom giant threaten to withhold programming to maximize its profits. Antitrust enforcers argued that the combination of AT&T’s TV-distribution network with Time Warner’s programming would lead to higher prices for consumers. A judge rejected that argument, and an appeals court upheld his decision.
But within a few years, AT&T spun off the business to Discovery Inc. The Justice Department reviewed the deal and ultimately opted against a challenge, though antitrust enforcers warned the companies they could reopen a probe later if warranted.
The Biden administration has been particularly critical of joint ventures in some markets, breaking up a partnership between American Airlines Group Inc. and JetBlue Airways Corp. last year, according to Diana Moss, vice president and director of competition policy at the Progressive Policy Institute.
‘Consumer Friendly’
“They’ve made it look very consumer-friendly in terms of the access issue,” she said. “But as always, the devil is going to be in the details in terms of how hard they compete with each other.”Even those who think the streaming deal will eventually be cleared think it may face a marathon review before reaching the finish line.
Paul Gallant, an analyst for Cowen & Co., said in a note to clients that regulators are likely to look at whether the joint venture would discourage Warner, Fox and Disney from bidding against each other for specific sports rights.
In previous cases, the Justice Department was reluctant to bless cable bundles between too many players, according to Salop, the Georgetown professor.
In 1983, the agency blocked a joint venture between Viacom’s Showtime and The Movie Channel, then owned by Warner and American Express Co. The partnership sought to combine two of the three leading providers of paid programming for cable subscribers and involved three of the six major Hollywood studios, which controlled between 40% and 50% of theatrical releases each year.
After the Justice Department said it would sue, Showtime and The Movie Channel revised their proposal to a straight merger that the two outside studios from the partnership. Antitrust enforcers allowed that deal to proceed.
The more than 40-year-old joint venture bid isn’t necessarily a template for how to handle a 21st Century deal featuring much more modern technology.
“We are skeptical that there is a clear antitrust case for blocking here,” Blair Levin, an analyst with New Street Research, said in a Feb. 12 note. “Still, the reactions of those hurt by the deal may ultimately lead to a government reaction, particularly to ensure that local sports remain available for free.”
Disney Chief Financial Officer Hugh Johnston on Feb. 8 told Bloomberg TV the service’s three members will continue to compete with each other for sports rights. And the companies were quick to point out the non-exclusive nature of the service.
Disney still plans to launch a streaming version of its flagship ESPN brand in about a year. It will have interactive features, including sports betting and the ability to chat with fellow fans, and will be priced below the new sports offering. Fox doesn’t have a subscription-based streaming service for sports content, and Warner Bros. Max service requires a $9.99 add-on for live sports streaming.
To contact the reporters on this story:
Leah Nylen in Washington at lnylen2@bloomberg.net;
Todd Shields in Washington at tshields3@bloomberg.net
To contact the editors responsible for this story:
Sara Forden at sforden@bloomberg.net;
Molly Schuetz at mschuetz9@bloomberg.net
Leah Nylen, Anthony Aarons
wabbott
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2021
- Messages
- 6,458
https://finance.yahoo.com/video/paramount-comcast-discussed-streaming-deal-154625883.html
Paramount, Comcast discussed a streaming deal: WSJ
Rachelle Akuffo
Fri, Feb 16, 2024, 9:46 AM CST
Paramount (PARA) has held discussions with Comcast (CMCSA), owner of NBCUniversal, about a potential streaming deal, according to a report from The Wall Street Journal. The talks center around developing a potential partnership or joint venture between the companies' streaming services, Paramount+ and Peacock. The talks come as questions swirl about Paramount's future, which includes reports about it being sold to a group of investors being led by SkyDance Media and a buyout offer from billionaire Byron Allen.
Yahoo Finance's Alexandra Canal reports the breaking details.
Video Transcript
- We have breaking news from the streaming world. According to the "Wall Street Journal," Paramount and Comcast are in talks to join forces in a new streaming venture, adding to the trend of consolidation in the sector. We have our very own Alexandra Canal here with the latest. So these two streaming apps potentially under one roof, what do we know?
ALEXANDRA CANAL: Yes. So this is a report from the "Wall Street Journal." I reached out to both companies for comment. They have not gotten back to me at this point, but Paramount, it hosts a decent amount of content. We have the "Taylor Sheridan Universe." We have "Star Trek." And you can also simultaneously watch NFL games that are on CBS on Paramount Plus.
Then if you take a look at Peacock, they have shows like "The Office." They also have a big live sports presence with soccer and football. So you think that the combination of this would leverage the opportunity for both of these companies to just have more content under their roof in addition to more live sports. And live sports has really been viewed as the last frontier of the streaming wars.
This comes on the heels of that joint venture announcement between ESPN, Warner Brothers, Discovery, and Fox. And when this first broke, initially, I thought, OK so this is in response to that. It seems like to me because at the end of the day, there's a lot of debt for these companies, especially when it comes to their streaming ambitions. This could be a way to help with cost savings, but at the same time, Paramount is one of those companies that has been floated around as a potential acquisition target.
We've heard Byron Allen has made a bid. Reportedly our parent company Apollo Global is interested, Skydance Media. So there's a lot of interest in Paramount as a company for its assets, for its film business, and even for Paramount Plus.
So if you were to combine Peacock with Paramount Plus, I wonder how that could shake up the M&A landscape as well? But we're seeing both of those stocks down right now. The broader market is lower as well, but just interesting to see even more consolidation in the space. And it seems like once again the big driver of this is sports.
- Well, you mentioned that the market reaction is a little muted. And it is a down day so far, but I'm curious whether or not this is an indication that the Street is maybe not thrilled about this news, or do you think that it's more just a wait and see if we have more information moving forward? It looks like, again, all of the names that we've been talking about are down today, but 1.8% on relatively good volume for Paramount in the red makes me think that there's something bigger here.
ALEXANDRA CANAL: I think there's a wait and see, but I also-- you have to remember, a lot of these companies are legacy media companies, right. So if you focus more energy on sports, you create these joint ventures. And the emphasis is, OK, we want to drive people to watch sports on our streaming platforms, not on linear. That is risky because at the end of the day linear is still profitable, right.
It's declining massively within cord cutting, but it's also what's powering a lot of the streaming business. So I think when you have a company like Paramount that has a lot of linear network exposure and they want to drive more people to streaming, that's automatically a red flag to investors. Well, what does that mean for their bottom line moving forward? So I think that's one thing.
Another question mark is, what is all this going to cost the consumer, right? We don't know what the ESPN, Warner Brothers, Discovery, Fox, joint venture is going to cost. If we see a combo here, is that going to be an increase in cost?
What does that mean for average revenue per user or ARPU, which is a big profitability metric? So still a lot of unknowns here that I think, investors, they want some clarity on, but 2024 is the year I think that we're going to see some dealmaking in this space or at least set us up for some serious moves in 2025. And clearly, these reports are just the start of that. A great beat for you, Ali.
- A lot going on, always busy.
- A busy day. And, of course, those lucrative sports ad dollars and licensing.
Paramount, Comcast discussed a streaming deal: WSJ
Rachelle Akuffo
Fri, Feb 16, 2024, 9:46 AM CST
Paramount (PARA) has held discussions with Comcast (CMCSA), owner of NBCUniversal, about a potential streaming deal, according to a report from The Wall Street Journal. The talks center around developing a potential partnership or joint venture between the companies' streaming services, Paramount+ and Peacock. The talks come as questions swirl about Paramount's future, which includes reports about it being sold to a group of investors being led by SkyDance Media and a buyout offer from billionaire Byron Allen.
Yahoo Finance's Alexandra Canal reports the breaking details.
Video Transcript
- We have breaking news from the streaming world. According to the "Wall Street Journal," Paramount and Comcast are in talks to join forces in a new streaming venture, adding to the trend of consolidation in the sector. We have our very own Alexandra Canal here with the latest. So these two streaming apps potentially under one roof, what do we know?
ALEXANDRA CANAL: Yes. So this is a report from the "Wall Street Journal." I reached out to both companies for comment. They have not gotten back to me at this point, but Paramount, it hosts a decent amount of content. We have the "Taylor Sheridan Universe." We have "Star Trek." And you can also simultaneously watch NFL games that are on CBS on Paramount Plus.
Then if you take a look at Peacock, they have shows like "The Office." They also have a big live sports presence with soccer and football. So you think that the combination of this would leverage the opportunity for both of these companies to just have more content under their roof in addition to more live sports. And live sports has really been viewed as the last frontier of the streaming wars.
This comes on the heels of that joint venture announcement between ESPN, Warner Brothers, Discovery, and Fox. And when this first broke, initially, I thought, OK so this is in response to that. It seems like to me because at the end of the day, there's a lot of debt for these companies, especially when it comes to their streaming ambitions. This could be a way to help with cost savings, but at the same time, Paramount is one of those companies that has been floated around as a potential acquisition target.
We've heard Byron Allen has made a bid. Reportedly our parent company Apollo Global is interested, Skydance Media. So there's a lot of interest in Paramount as a company for its assets, for its film business, and even for Paramount Plus.
So if you were to combine Peacock with Paramount Plus, I wonder how that could shake up the M&A landscape as well? But we're seeing both of those stocks down right now. The broader market is lower as well, but just interesting to see even more consolidation in the space. And it seems like once again the big driver of this is sports.
- Well, you mentioned that the market reaction is a little muted. And it is a down day so far, but I'm curious whether or not this is an indication that the Street is maybe not thrilled about this news, or do you think that it's more just a wait and see if we have more information moving forward? It looks like, again, all of the names that we've been talking about are down today, but 1.8% on relatively good volume for Paramount in the red makes me think that there's something bigger here.
ALEXANDRA CANAL: I think there's a wait and see, but I also-- you have to remember, a lot of these companies are legacy media companies, right. So if you focus more energy on sports, you create these joint ventures. And the emphasis is, OK, we want to drive people to watch sports on our streaming platforms, not on linear. That is risky because at the end of the day linear is still profitable, right.
It's declining massively within cord cutting, but it's also what's powering a lot of the streaming business. So I think when you have a company like Paramount that has a lot of linear network exposure and they want to drive more people to streaming, that's automatically a red flag to investors. Well, what does that mean for their bottom line moving forward? So I think that's one thing.
Another question mark is, what is all this going to cost the consumer, right? We don't know what the ESPN, Warner Brothers, Discovery, Fox, joint venture is going to cost. If we see a combo here, is that going to be an increase in cost?
What does that mean for average revenue per user or ARPU, which is a big profitability metric? So still a lot of unknowns here that I think, investors, they want some clarity on, but 2024 is the year I think that we're going to see some dealmaking in this space or at least set us up for some serious moves in 2025. And clearly, these reports are just the start of that. A great beat for you, Ali.
- A lot going on, always busy.
- A busy day. And, of course, those lucrative sports ad dollars and licensing.
Interesting discussion on Disney mostly around the media business and ESPN.
Super Bowl streaming, Disney deep dive and why numbers don't lie Investing Experts
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/investing-experts/id1653747327?i=1000645217211&utm_source
Super Bowl streaming, Disney deep dive and why numbers don't lie Investing Experts
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/investing-experts/id1653747327?i=1000645217211&utm_source
wabbott
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2021
- Messages
- 6,458
https://variety.com/2024/biz/news/disney-stock-rises-nelson-peltz-proxy-fight-1235914753/
Feb 17, 2024 5:31am PST
by Todd Spangler
Trian’s Disney Shares Have Gained $500 Million in Value So Far This Month. Why Is Activist Investor Nelson Peltz Still Unhappy?
Nelson Peltz, the activist investor who runs hedge fund Trian Partners, believes urgent change is needed at Disney. He’s waging a proxy-fight battle to install himself and ex-Disney CFO Jay Rasulo as directors, a vote that will go up at Disney’s 2024 annual shareholders meeting April 3.
What does Trian want? “Fundamentally and crudely, we want the stock to go up,” Peltz says in a video on Trian’s Disney proxy-fight site.
Well, so far in February, Disney shares are up 16.2% — which has increased the value of the shares Trian controls by about $500 million. As of Friday’s closing price, the 32.3 million shares of Disney that Trian beneficially owns (79% of which are owned by ex-Marvel Entertainment chair Ike Perlmutter) are worth $3.6 billion.
What drove investors to rally around Disney stock: Its Feb. 7 earnings report for the December 2023 quarter showed improvements in cost reductions, including in its streaming business. And CEO Bob Iger touted a string of new initiatives, including the Disney’s joint venture with Fox and Warner Bros. Discovery to create a sports-centric streaming bundle, plans to debut a stand-alone streaming version of ESPN as early as August 2025 and a $1.5 billion strategic investment in “Fortnite” maker Epic Games. He also revealed a surprise November 2024 premiere date for animated film “Moana 2,” and revealed an exclusive deal for Taylor Swift’s Eras Tour concert film to stream on Disney+ (complete with five bonus songs).
Disney has “turned the corner and entered a new era for our company, focused on fortifying ESPN for the future, building streaming into a profitable growth business, reinvigorating our film studios, and turbocharging growth in our parks and experiences,” Iger said in announcing earnings.
But Peltz isn’t backing down from his battle with Iger and the current Disney board.
Trian dismissed the Mouse House’s announcements as a “spaghetti-against-the-wall” plan. In a letter dated Feb. 12, the hedge fund said among other things that the Epic Games investment “lacks a product roadmap or expected return targets” and that the sports streaming venture with Fox and WBD “likely confused consumers, surprised important content partners and competes with the company’s own services.”
“Frenetic activity, in the face of a proxy contest, is not a substitute for a well-considered corporate strategy,” Trian said in the letter. “Nor is throwing spaghetti at the wall going to feed shareholders who have been starved of returns for so long. Disney shareholders need the company to consistently perform under the watchful eye of a vigilant board.”
Trian also noted that Disney’s board “has still not identified a successor for Mr. Iger.” At the New York Times DealBook Summit in November, Iger — whose renewed contract runs through the end of 2026 — asserted that “the succession process at Disney is robust right now” and “We’re aggressively pursuing succession.”
Trian even included a cartoon depicting Disney board members throwing spaghetti (and meatballs) at a corporate boardroom wall, a reference to business jargon for “seeing what sticks” out of a fusillade of unproven strategies:
Disney released its own letter to shareholders on Feb. 12, which it posted on its own proxy-vote campaign site (votedisney.com).
“Your Board and management team remain committed to driving meaningful growth and creating sustainable shareholder value long into the future,” the Disney letter said, which recapped Iger’s earnings-day announcements. “Despite these efforts, two activist hedge funds, Trian Fund Management, L.P. and Blackwells Capital, are each seeking to replace members of your Board with their own separate nominees, none of whom your Board believes possess the appropriate range of talent, skill, perspective and/or expertise to effectively support Disney’s building priorities in the face of continuing industry-wide challenges.”
In a Feb. 14 interview with CNBC, Peltz commented that Iger’s “pronouncements” about new initiatives “reminds me of a politician making election-day announcements versus State of the Union speeches. State of the Union is what I want to hear about, not election-day promises.”
Meanwhile, in releasing earnings, Disney announced that its board approved a new share repurchase program effective Feb. 7, 2024, with plans to target $3 billion in repurchases in fiscal year 2024. The board also declared a cash dividend payable in July 2024 of 45 cents per share, up 50% over the dividend paid in January — which was the first dividend in more than three years, after Disney suspended dividend payouts during the COVID pandemic.
ADVERTISEMENT
Peltz, in the Valentine’s Day interview on CNBC, questioned whether Disney can “really afford” continued dividend payments and share buybacks. “The balance sheet has been really injured,” he said. Peltz also said Trian will release a white paper, promised to be a deep dive with prescriptive proposals on how Disney can improve its long-term financial performance, in “a couple of weeks.”
“Everybody better sit down with a nice, warm glass of milk, get comfortable, because you’re going to see chapter and verse on Disney,” Peltz said.
By the way, Peltz has no quarrel with the Disney+ deal for Swift’s Eras Tour movie, reportedly worth more than $75 million. “A real fan. I love her,” Peltz told CNBC. “That’s right. Can’t argue with that.”
Feb 17, 2024 5:31am PST
by Todd Spangler
Trian’s Disney Shares Have Gained $500 Million in Value So Far This Month. Why Is Activist Investor Nelson Peltz Still Unhappy?
Nelson Peltz, the activist investor who runs hedge fund Trian Partners, believes urgent change is needed at Disney. He’s waging a proxy-fight battle to install himself and ex-Disney CFO Jay Rasulo as directors, a vote that will go up at Disney’s 2024 annual shareholders meeting April 3.
What does Trian want? “Fundamentally and crudely, we want the stock to go up,” Peltz says in a video on Trian’s Disney proxy-fight site.
Well, so far in February, Disney shares are up 16.2% — which has increased the value of the shares Trian controls by about $500 million. As of Friday’s closing price, the 32.3 million shares of Disney that Trian beneficially owns (79% of which are owned by ex-Marvel Entertainment chair Ike Perlmutter) are worth $3.6 billion.
What drove investors to rally around Disney stock: Its Feb. 7 earnings report for the December 2023 quarter showed improvements in cost reductions, including in its streaming business. And CEO Bob Iger touted a string of new initiatives, including the Disney’s joint venture with Fox and Warner Bros. Discovery to create a sports-centric streaming bundle, plans to debut a stand-alone streaming version of ESPN as early as August 2025 and a $1.5 billion strategic investment in “Fortnite” maker Epic Games. He also revealed a surprise November 2024 premiere date for animated film “Moana 2,” and revealed an exclusive deal for Taylor Swift’s Eras Tour concert film to stream on Disney+ (complete with five bonus songs).
Disney has “turned the corner and entered a new era for our company, focused on fortifying ESPN for the future, building streaming into a profitable growth business, reinvigorating our film studios, and turbocharging growth in our parks and experiences,” Iger said in announcing earnings.
But Peltz isn’t backing down from his battle with Iger and the current Disney board.
Trian dismissed the Mouse House’s announcements as a “spaghetti-against-the-wall” plan. In a letter dated Feb. 12, the hedge fund said among other things that the Epic Games investment “lacks a product roadmap or expected return targets” and that the sports streaming venture with Fox and WBD “likely confused consumers, surprised important content partners and competes with the company’s own services.”
“Frenetic activity, in the face of a proxy contest, is not a substitute for a well-considered corporate strategy,” Trian said in the letter. “Nor is throwing spaghetti at the wall going to feed shareholders who have been starved of returns for so long. Disney shareholders need the company to consistently perform under the watchful eye of a vigilant board.”
Trian also noted that Disney’s board “has still not identified a successor for Mr. Iger.” At the New York Times DealBook Summit in November, Iger — whose renewed contract runs through the end of 2026 — asserted that “the succession process at Disney is robust right now” and “We’re aggressively pursuing succession.”
Trian even included a cartoon depicting Disney board members throwing spaghetti (and meatballs) at a corporate boardroom wall, a reference to business jargon for “seeing what sticks” out of a fusillade of unproven strategies:
Disney released its own letter to shareholders on Feb. 12, which it posted on its own proxy-vote campaign site (votedisney.com).
“Your Board and management team remain committed to driving meaningful growth and creating sustainable shareholder value long into the future,” the Disney letter said, which recapped Iger’s earnings-day announcements. “Despite these efforts, two activist hedge funds, Trian Fund Management, L.P. and Blackwells Capital, are each seeking to replace members of your Board with their own separate nominees, none of whom your Board believes possess the appropriate range of talent, skill, perspective and/or expertise to effectively support Disney’s building priorities in the face of continuing industry-wide challenges.”
In a Feb. 14 interview with CNBC, Peltz commented that Iger’s “pronouncements” about new initiatives “reminds me of a politician making election-day announcements versus State of the Union speeches. State of the Union is what I want to hear about, not election-day promises.”
Meanwhile, in releasing earnings, Disney announced that its board approved a new share repurchase program effective Feb. 7, 2024, with plans to target $3 billion in repurchases in fiscal year 2024. The board also declared a cash dividend payable in July 2024 of 45 cents per share, up 50% over the dividend paid in January — which was the first dividend in more than three years, after Disney suspended dividend payouts during the COVID pandemic.
ADVERTISEMENT
Peltz, in the Valentine’s Day interview on CNBC, questioned whether Disney can “really afford” continued dividend payments and share buybacks. “The balance sheet has been really injured,” he said. Peltz also said Trian will release a white paper, promised to be a deep dive with prescriptive proposals on how Disney can improve its long-term financial performance, in “a couple of weeks.”
“Everybody better sit down with a nice, warm glass of milk, get comfortable, because you’re going to see chapter and verse on Disney,” Peltz said.
By the way, Peltz has no quarrel with the Disney+ deal for Swift’s Eras Tour movie, reportedly worth more than $75 million. “A real fan. I love her,” Peltz told CNBC. “That’s right. Can’t argue with that.”
wabbott
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2021
- Messages
- 6,458
https://www.msn.com/en-us/entertain...ging-tenure-as-abc-news-president/ar-BB1irg69
Inside Kim Godwin’s Challenging Tenure as ABC News President
Expected to be a change agent, Godwin became a polarizing figure and was recently given a new boss; her backers praise her management style
By Joe Flint and Isabella Simonetti
Feb. 17, 2024 - 1:29 pm EST
Kim Godwin had reached a breaking point.
The ABC News president confronted employees last March, shortly after reading an article about her tenure. The article was the latest in a series of unflattering pieces that featured anonymous comments from newsroom insiders insinuating that she was more interested in raising her own profile than running the news division.
Godwin urged staffers to focus on the work and said the leaks were undermining their efforts and ABC News overall, according to multiple people who heard her voice these sentiments.
Two weeks later, Godwin ousted much of the unit’s veteran leadership including the heads of talent relations, newsgathering, investigative journalism and other senior editorial staffers.
A few days ago, Godwin found herself at the center of another shake-up: Her contract was renewed, but a new structure was put in place that knocked the news president down a peg in the executive pecking order.
Godwin had reported to Dana Walden, the co-chairman of Disney Entertainment who is seen as a potential successor to Chief Executive Bob Iger.
In a move that effectively layered Godwin, Walden has put Debra OConnell, a Disney veteran of nearly 30 years, over ABC News. OConnell, who is based in New York, is expected to be a visible presence inside ABC News and is familiar with the unit, having scrutinized operations across Disney’s networks as part of an effort to find cost savings and greater efficiency, The Wall Street Journal previously reported.
A ratings leader is facing challenges
When Godwin joined ABC News from CBS less than three years ago, she had her work cut out for her. Though the news division was a ratings leader, many in the news division said it was suffering from a cutthroat and toxic culture. Two prominent executives had recently been fired: One was accused of making racially insensitive comments; the other was accused of sexual harassment.
Now, Godwin has become a polarizing figure inside the network. Detractors say she and her inner circle are stifling discussion and dissent while failing to rise up to challenges facing the unit—including sagging ratings. Several of the ousted veterans were replaced with executives with less hard-news experience.
Godwin’s supporters counter that as the first Black person to run a broadcast network news division, she is the target of constant second-guessing by a cadre of longtime ABC News staffers who set out to undermine her from day one. Many of the executives who were pushed out last spring were part of a clubby culture at the network, they said, and their management style clashed with the culture of inclusion and collaboration Godwin sought to build.
“She has done an amazing job here under very difficult circumstances,” said Marc Burstein, a senior executive producer of special events. “She has her own leadership style that is different, but it works for the time we are living in.”
At a recent companywide town hall meeting, Iger seemed to be throwing down a gauntlet to Godwin to come up with a business plan to ensure a strong future for the unit. “Create a vision for the future of ABC News and fight like hell to get the resources from the company to support it,” Iger told employees during the event.
Inside Disney’s headquarters, the fate of ABC News pales in comparison with other issues facing the media giant including a proxy battle with activist investor Nelson Peltz, building successful streaming businesses in Disney+ and ESPN+, launching a new sports streamer with Fox and Warner Discovery and finding an eventual successor for Iger.
Still, ABC News is in many ways a face of the company, with its morning and evening news shows and daytime chat show “The View.”
ABC News’s highest-profile programs—“World News Tonight” and “Good Morning America”—still lead other broadcast programs in viewers in their respective slots, but they have been underperforming lately. In the coveted 25 to 54 demographic, “GMA” not only trails NBC’s “Today” but has also lagged behind “CBS Mornings” on multiple occasions in recent weeks.
The decline in ratings comes as “GMA” has lost on-air talent including Amy Robach and T.J. Holmes, the hosts of the third hour of “GMA.” The two anchors were pushed out about a year ago, after news of their affair broke into the open.
In another blow, Cecilia Vega, a “GMA” contributor and respected Washington correspondent, departed for CBS’s “60 Minutes” several months ago.
ABC’s affiliates have noticed the recent rating declines and are hoping the recent executive shake-up can help turn things around.
“I take Disney’s recent personnel moves as confirmation that it prioritizes ABC News programming in a way that will evolve the product and grow the audience in a competitive marketplace,” said Adam Symson, chief executive of E.W. Scripps, a major owner of ABC affiliates.
Seldom in the control room
Behind the scenes, employees have said they were frustrated by what they perceived as Godwin’s lack of involvement in day-to-day operations compared with her predecessors.
Some ABC News veterans disagree with that assessment.
“I’ve been at ABC News for 20 years now under four different presidents and I’ve never had a stronger relationship than with Kim,” said Jonathan Karl, chief White House correspondent and co-anchor of the Sunday morning political show “This Week.”
Karl said criticism that Godwin is disengaged “certainly does not reflect the reality of who she is,” adding, “she’s a crazy workaholic.” He credited Godwin with breaking down in-house competition between various news shows and instilling a one-for-all approach, improving how people treat each other, and encouraging more of a work-life balance.
Since joining ABC News, Godwin has tried to create a gentler office culture. She ends her emails with “People Are Our Priority” and is known for leading happy birthday sing-a-longs for employees.
At a lunch in New York last February, Iger was pressed by some Black ABC News talent about what they perceived as unfair treatment of Godwin, who was also in attendance, according to people familiar with the matter. Iger reassured attendees that he and Walden had Godwin’s back and were “invested in her success.”
Godwin’s predecessors, James Goldston and Ben Sherwood, were known as round-the-clock managers who lived in the control room. Godwin’s approach has been more hands-off, and at times she has made remarks that suggest she isn’t a regular viewer of ABC News shows, staffers say.
Once at the 9 a.m. editorial meeting, Godwin said it was important for “GMA” to show Black people, particularly children, getting the Covid vaccination. Staffers of the show looked befuddled as that very morning they had aired such a segment, people at the meeting said.
A person close to Godwin noted that the network produces more than 100 hours of news content a week and said that focusing on a single shot is nitpicking.
Burstein also disputes the picture of Godwin being uninvolved. “When it is an important event, she is in the control room. She wants to know what’s going on,” he said.
Before joining ABC News, Godwin spent more than a decade at CBS News holding posts including executive vice president, senior broadcast producer and executive director for development and diversity. She cut her teeth in local news working for NBC and CBS affiliates after graduating from Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University, known as FAMU.
A big fan of FAMU
Many ABC News insiders say Godwin has been using her position to benefit FAMU, including a 2022 “GMA” segment on how the school celebrates homecoming.
Godwin also persuaded Disney to create a $1 million grant for a FAMU fellowship program. Fellows receive internships, and unlike most ABC News internships, applicants receive a stipend and housing. At one point, there were 16 FAMU interns at the network.
In announcing the fellowship program, Godwin said her attendance at the historically Black university changed her life and that Disney was “investing in the next generation of journalists.”
In a statement, FAMU President Larry Robinson praised Godwin’s philanthropic support of the school and said she remains a role model for students and alumni.
In a December 2023 FAMU commencement address, Godwin advised graduates on how to handle critics.
“There will be people along your journey who will try to make you doubt that you are ready, that you are prepared, that you are enough,” she said. “I stand here today as proof that if you just let the haters hate and hold on to the plans that you know are for you, you will not just survive, you will thrive.”
Write to Joe Flint at Joe.Flint@wsj.com and Isabella Simonetti at isabella.simonetti@wsj.com
Inside Kim Godwin’s Challenging Tenure as ABC News President
Expected to be a change agent, Godwin became a polarizing figure and was recently given a new boss; her backers praise her management style
By Joe Flint and Isabella Simonetti
Feb. 17, 2024 - 1:29 pm EST
Kim Godwin had reached a breaking point.
The ABC News president confronted employees last March, shortly after reading an article about her tenure. The article was the latest in a series of unflattering pieces that featured anonymous comments from newsroom insiders insinuating that she was more interested in raising her own profile than running the news division.
Godwin urged staffers to focus on the work and said the leaks were undermining their efforts and ABC News overall, according to multiple people who heard her voice these sentiments.
Two weeks later, Godwin ousted much of the unit’s veteran leadership including the heads of talent relations, newsgathering, investigative journalism and other senior editorial staffers.
A few days ago, Godwin found herself at the center of another shake-up: Her contract was renewed, but a new structure was put in place that knocked the news president down a peg in the executive pecking order.
Godwin had reported to Dana Walden, the co-chairman of Disney Entertainment who is seen as a potential successor to Chief Executive Bob Iger.
In a move that effectively layered Godwin, Walden has put Debra OConnell, a Disney veteran of nearly 30 years, over ABC News. OConnell, who is based in New York, is expected to be a visible presence inside ABC News and is familiar with the unit, having scrutinized operations across Disney’s networks as part of an effort to find cost savings and greater efficiency, The Wall Street Journal previously reported.
A ratings leader is facing challenges
When Godwin joined ABC News from CBS less than three years ago, she had her work cut out for her. Though the news division was a ratings leader, many in the news division said it was suffering from a cutthroat and toxic culture. Two prominent executives had recently been fired: One was accused of making racially insensitive comments; the other was accused of sexual harassment.
Now, Godwin has become a polarizing figure inside the network. Detractors say she and her inner circle are stifling discussion and dissent while failing to rise up to challenges facing the unit—including sagging ratings. Several of the ousted veterans were replaced with executives with less hard-news experience.
Godwin’s supporters counter that as the first Black person to run a broadcast network news division, she is the target of constant second-guessing by a cadre of longtime ABC News staffers who set out to undermine her from day one. Many of the executives who were pushed out last spring were part of a clubby culture at the network, they said, and their management style clashed with the culture of inclusion and collaboration Godwin sought to build.
“She has done an amazing job here under very difficult circumstances,” said Marc Burstein, a senior executive producer of special events. “She has her own leadership style that is different, but it works for the time we are living in.”
At a recent companywide town hall meeting, Iger seemed to be throwing down a gauntlet to Godwin to come up with a business plan to ensure a strong future for the unit. “Create a vision for the future of ABC News and fight like hell to get the resources from the company to support it,” Iger told employees during the event.
Inside Disney’s headquarters, the fate of ABC News pales in comparison with other issues facing the media giant including a proxy battle with activist investor Nelson Peltz, building successful streaming businesses in Disney+ and ESPN+, launching a new sports streamer with Fox and Warner Discovery and finding an eventual successor for Iger.
Still, ABC News is in many ways a face of the company, with its morning and evening news shows and daytime chat show “The View.”
ABC News’s highest-profile programs—“World News Tonight” and “Good Morning America”—still lead other broadcast programs in viewers in their respective slots, but they have been underperforming lately. In the coveted 25 to 54 demographic, “GMA” not only trails NBC’s “Today” but has also lagged behind “CBS Mornings” on multiple occasions in recent weeks.
The decline in ratings comes as “GMA” has lost on-air talent including Amy Robach and T.J. Holmes, the hosts of the third hour of “GMA.” The two anchors were pushed out about a year ago, after news of their affair broke into the open.
In another blow, Cecilia Vega, a “GMA” contributor and respected Washington correspondent, departed for CBS’s “60 Minutes” several months ago.
ABC’s affiliates have noticed the recent rating declines and are hoping the recent executive shake-up can help turn things around.
“I take Disney’s recent personnel moves as confirmation that it prioritizes ABC News programming in a way that will evolve the product and grow the audience in a competitive marketplace,” said Adam Symson, chief executive of E.W. Scripps, a major owner of ABC affiliates.
Seldom in the control room
Behind the scenes, employees have said they were frustrated by what they perceived as Godwin’s lack of involvement in day-to-day operations compared with her predecessors.
Some ABC News veterans disagree with that assessment.
“I’ve been at ABC News for 20 years now under four different presidents and I’ve never had a stronger relationship than with Kim,” said Jonathan Karl, chief White House correspondent and co-anchor of the Sunday morning political show “This Week.”
Karl said criticism that Godwin is disengaged “certainly does not reflect the reality of who she is,” adding, “she’s a crazy workaholic.” He credited Godwin with breaking down in-house competition between various news shows and instilling a one-for-all approach, improving how people treat each other, and encouraging more of a work-life balance.
Since joining ABC News, Godwin has tried to create a gentler office culture. She ends her emails with “People Are Our Priority” and is known for leading happy birthday sing-a-longs for employees.
At a lunch in New York last February, Iger was pressed by some Black ABC News talent about what they perceived as unfair treatment of Godwin, who was also in attendance, according to people familiar with the matter. Iger reassured attendees that he and Walden had Godwin’s back and were “invested in her success.”
Godwin’s predecessors, James Goldston and Ben Sherwood, were known as round-the-clock managers who lived in the control room. Godwin’s approach has been more hands-off, and at times she has made remarks that suggest she isn’t a regular viewer of ABC News shows, staffers say.
Once at the 9 a.m. editorial meeting, Godwin said it was important for “GMA” to show Black people, particularly children, getting the Covid vaccination. Staffers of the show looked befuddled as that very morning they had aired such a segment, people at the meeting said.
A person close to Godwin noted that the network produces more than 100 hours of news content a week and said that focusing on a single shot is nitpicking.
Burstein also disputes the picture of Godwin being uninvolved. “When it is an important event, she is in the control room. She wants to know what’s going on,” he said.
Before joining ABC News, Godwin spent more than a decade at CBS News holding posts including executive vice president, senior broadcast producer and executive director for development and diversity. She cut her teeth in local news working for NBC and CBS affiliates after graduating from Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University, known as FAMU.
A big fan of FAMU
Many ABC News insiders say Godwin has been using her position to benefit FAMU, including a 2022 “GMA” segment on how the school celebrates homecoming.
Godwin also persuaded Disney to create a $1 million grant for a FAMU fellowship program. Fellows receive internships, and unlike most ABC News internships, applicants receive a stipend and housing. At one point, there were 16 FAMU interns at the network.
In announcing the fellowship program, Godwin said her attendance at the historically Black university changed her life and that Disney was “investing in the next generation of journalists.”
In a statement, FAMU President Larry Robinson praised Godwin’s philanthropic support of the school and said she remains a role model for students and alumni.
In a December 2023 FAMU commencement address, Godwin advised graduates on how to handle critics.
“There will be people along your journey who will try to make you doubt that you are ready, that you are prepared, that you are enough,” she said. “I stand here today as proof that if you just let the haters hate and hold on to the plans that you know are for you, you will not just survive, you will thrive.”
Write to Joe Flint at Joe.Flint@wsj.com and Isabella Simonetti at isabella.simonetti@wsj.com
wabbott
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2021
- Messages
- 6,458
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/feat...struggles-leave-shari-redstone-exploring-sale
How Paramount Became a Cautionary Tale of the Streaming Wars
Shari Redstone inherited her father’s storied media empire and tried to take on Netflix. Now it’s looking for a buyer.
By Lucas Shaw
February 16, 2024 at 5:00 AM CST
"Sumner Redstone was a buyer, not a seller. Starting in the mid-1980s, he built his family’s movie theater chain into one of the world’s most valuable media companies, Viacom, through high-profile acquisitions. He outmaneuvered peers to acquire a legendary broadcast network (CBS), an iconic studio (Paramount Pictures) and popular cable channels (Nickelodeon and MTV).
Redstone relished his Hollywood lifestyle. He attended premieres, cycled through young girlfriends and hosted stars at his Los Angeles mansion. He couldn’t imagine surrendering any part of his company. In 2016, when then-Chief Executive Officer Philippe Dauman tried to sell a minority stake of Paramount studio—the company was struggling, and he was trying to raise money—the 93-year-old Redstone ousted Dauman, his longtime lawyer and protégé, from the company. “Viacom is at the center of my life,” Redstone, a lawyer himself, wrote in his memoir, A Passion to Win. “It is my world.”
Redstone died in 2020. Unfortunately for his heirs, the foundation on which he built his world—movies and cable TV—is crumbling. The number of people who pay for live-TV service has dropped about 30 million from its peak of more than 100 million starting in 2010; meanwhile, domestic moviegoing has plummeted to all-time lows. Redstone’s TV networks have been hit especially hard because their primary audience, viewers under the age of 34, have all but abandoned cable for Netflix, TikTok and YouTube. The company, now known as Paramount Global, has tried to offset the damage by cutting costs. But the lack of investment has only accelerated the loss of viewers and advertisers. Paramount’s TV ad sales are projected to have fallen $1 billion last year.
Sumner’s daughter, Shari, who took over for her father as chairman, thought that streaming would save the company. She’s spent billions of dollars on original series for its flagship service, Paramount+, producing spinoffs of hit shows such as Yellowstone and expanding the Star Trek universe. Yet all that spending hasn’t attracted a large audience. Paramount+ accounted for less than 1% of TV viewing in November, behind not only Netflix and Hulu but also Peacock, the Roku Channel and Tubi. Paramount’s streaming business is projected to have lost about $1.5 billion in 2023, dragging down earnings for the entire company. (Paramount has said that its losses likely peaked last year.)
Paramount isn’t the only traditional media player that doesn’t exactly have a success story to tell these days. The collapse of cable TV and the rise of streaming have wreaked havoc on the entertainment business, prompting widespread layoffs, two labor strikes and consolidation. “The whole industry is guilty of mistakes,” says Rich Greenfield, an analyst with LightShed Partners, a tech, media and telecommunications research company. Even Walt Disney Co., the mightiest of the entertainment giants, has had to fire thousands of employees and slash billions of dollars from its programming budget.
Although “you can’t singularly penalize” Paramount in such a tumultuous media moment, Greenfield says, the company has a smaller margin for error than most of its peers. Disney has lucrative theme parks, and Warner Bros. Discovery Inc. owns the largest TV studio, but Paramount made all its profit last year from traditional TV networks, according to projections—which is why Wall Street has all but given up hope. The company’s market capitalization has plunged below $9 billion, less than a third of what it was five years ago. With more than $16 billion in debt and little cash coming in, Paramount has had to slash the dividend it pays to National Amusements Inc., the Redstones’ holding company. Paramount’s decline has also forced Shari Redstone to contemplate what her father would never: a sale of the family business.
For the past several months, Redstone has been conducting an informal auction, according to more than a dozen interviews with people involved in the process, such as current and former employees, financial advisers and bidders. She’s held discussions about selling control of Paramount to suitors including budding media mogul David Ellison, private equity firm Apollo Global Management Inc. and Warner Bros. Discovery, home to HBO and CNN. Former stand-up comedian Byron Allen has made two separate bids for Paramount, the first of which the company rejected. There’s still a pretty good chance no deal will happen; high interest rates and a federal government that’s wary of mergers both stand in the way, as does Paramount’s sinking share price.
If Redstone can’t find a solution, the company will be in danger of becoming an industry stalwart whose downfall exposes the deterioration of an entire sector. Paramount’s decline jeopardizes the future of its namesake studio, an almost 112-year-old institution that released The Godfather, Grease and Titanic. It also imperils CBS News, the home of Edward R. Murrow, Walter Cronkite and 60 Minutes. MTV, Nickelodeon and Comedy Central, which raised generations of kids, are already afterthoughts to anyone born this century.
The company’s troubles are also a warning sign for Hollywood, which looked to avoid the fate of newspapers, magazines and music—industries ravaged by the internet. But as media companies struggle to transition from cable to streaming, they’re surrendering the next generation of TV viewers to short-form video apps and services that tech giants in Silicon Valley and China own. So far, Hollywood has relied on restructuring and layoffs rather than innovation and growth, leading to questions about whether we’re in the last great age of TV."
Sumner Redstone split CBS from Viacom in 2006. He thought it would benefit the latter: Cable was booming—investors liked niche networks—and broadcast was seen as slow-growing and a drag on the stock. Shari opposed the move, one of several disagreements that prompted her to strike out on her own. After starting a venture capital company, among other projects, she returned to the family fold when she worried that two younger paramours were taking advantage of her father; she eventually ejected them from the family home. Redstone then spent years battling Dauman and then-CBS CEO Leslie Moonves (who didn’t want her meddling in his business) for control of her family’s two big media companies.
When Shari reunited CBS and Viacom in 2019, most media executives said it was too little too late. Netflix Inc. and Amazon.com Inc. were already spending billions of dollars annually on original programming and had built streaming services with global audiences. (Dauman had spent more than $15 billion buying back Viacom stock rather than investing in the company’s future.) Facing this onslaught from Silicon Valley, some moguls decided to cash in rather than compete. Rupert Murdoch sold most of Fox’s entertainment assets to Disney. Jeff Bewkes sold Time Warner Inc. to AT&T Inc. But Redstone, a lawyer who was as pugnacious as her father was, was in no mood to surrender.
“There was a window during which she could have pursued a merger or sale,” says one former executive, who declined to be identified because of confidentiality clauses in their exit agreement. Netflix inquired about buying Paramount Pictures in 2019 and again in more recent years. “Shari was hesitant,” the executive adds. “She had inherited this legacy.”
Instead, Redstone decided to go all-in on streaming. On their own, neither CBS nor Viacom had the scale to compete with Netflix. Viacom had no paid streaming service and had licensed two of its most popular titles, Yellowstone and South Park, to rival services. CBS had All Access and Showtime, two niche services. But the combined company owned more than 140,000 TV episodes and 3,600 movies; it was the home of NCIS, SpongeBob SquarePants and Star Trek and had rights to the NFL. Surely, Redstone thought, that would be enough.
Crafting the streaming strategy fell to Bob Bakish, a former management consultant who joined Viacom in the late 1990s. Bakish had overseen the company’s international operations and was relatively unknown in US media. But with the executive ranks of both her companies hollowed out, Redstone thought Bakish—strategic, practical and, most important, loyal—was the right fit for CEO.
Bakish had the mandate to build a streaming service, but he didn’t have the balance sheet to pay for it. The merger created a company with $19 billion in debt. To raise money, Bakish sold real estate, including the famed CBS headquarters in New York, and tried to sell book publisher Simon & Schuster. (The government blocked the sale to a competitor but later approved a deal at a lower price to private equity firm Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co.) He also cut costs at the company’s cable networks, gutting executive teams and programming budgets.
In 2021, Redstone and Bakish unveiled Paramount+, their answer to Netflix. The service included original movies from Paramount, a reboot of MTV’s The Real World and spinoffs of Yellowstone. Bakish advertised Paramount+ as a “mountain of entertainment,” a play on the snowy peak in the Paramount logo. The service arrived months after similar offerings from Disney, Apple Inc. and Comcast Corp., companies that dwarfed Paramount in sales and profit.
Paramount+ defied skeptics by growing more quickly than anyone anticipated. Despite its late start, the service amassed more than 50 million customers—and was adding more people in the US than any competitor. (This is still true.) Paramount’s other streaming service, Pluto TV, was growing even more quickly. Bakish had acquired the free, ad-supported business, which has hundreds of niche live channels, for only $340 million in 2019, and it was now worth billions. “The strategy we have is indisputably working,” he told Bloomberg News in September 2022. That year, Paramount released the highest-grossing movie in company history, Top Gun: Maverick, at the same time it had the most-watched drama on cable, Yellowstone.
But the company’s investment in Paramount+ couldn’t have had worse timing. It had started adding millions of customers just as rising inflation and a war in Ukraine changed how Wall Street evaluated companies. Fast growth and losses were out; profit was in. Making matters worse, Netflix’s growth stalled at the start of 2022, causing investors to worry that streaming had peaked. Whereas Netflix had spent years building toward profitability, most other companies were trying to replicate its success within an accelerated time frame. Streaming growth across the industry slowed right when companies were experiencing their worst losses.
As Paramount’s stock languished, David Nevins saw an opportunity. The former head of Showtime thought he should’ve been put in charge of programming strategy for Paramount+, given his role in creating hit shows such as Billions, Dexter and Weeds. But Bakish didn’t think Nevins’ tastes were broad enough. The company’s biggest hits were shows such as Blue Bloods and Yellowstone, not Showtime dramas. Bakish instead split oversight among multiple executives, including Nevins, who left at the end of 2022. Now on the outside, he put together financing to try to buy Showtime.
Teaming up with private equity firm General Atlantic, he offered more than $3 billion for his old network. Given Paramount’s need for cash, this seemed a no-brainer to Nevins and his financial advisers. Paramount rebuffed the offer, claiming Showtime was worth at least $5 billion. Some board members thought Paramount should take the money, but Bakish convinced them he could make more by milking Showtime for cash and folding it into Paramount+. He also had another deal in the works. He wanted to sell BET.
A touchstone of the Black community, Black Entertainment Television LLC had its own studio and a streaming service partly owned by filmmaker Tyler Perry. But it was missing out on ad dollars because it was owned by a White family, according to several people who spoke to Bloomberg Businessweek; industry experts told Bakish that advertisers would spend more money on BET if it could say it’s a Black-owned business. So he got a who’s who of Black media figures to bid, including Perry, Sean “Diddy” Combs and Allen. Bids topped $2 billion, but Paramount refused to sell for less than $3 billion. After rejecting the offer for Showtime and failing to sell BET, many Paramount employees and even some board members questioned Bakish’s handling of the sales. “We got an unsolicited offer for Showtime [from Nevins]. We looked at it. And the reality is it wasn’t that interesting to us,” Bakish said last year. (He hasn’t addressed the BET negotiations.) Paramount has been holding talks of late to sell BET to Scott Mills, its current CEO, along with outside investors.
Redstone’s doubts ran deeper. Paramount’s woes had forced the company to slash the dividend it pays to shareholders, thereby creating financial problems for her family. National Amusements relied on the cash infusions from Paramount to sustain its chain of struggling movie theaters and to pay off its debt. Last May, National Amusements raised $125 million by selling a stake to an investment firm founded by computer billionaire Michael Dell and investment banker Byron Trott. “What they’ve done to the balance sheet by competing with Netflix has created real financial problems,” LightShed’s Greenfield says. The value of the Redstone family’s stake in its media companies has dwindled from more than $5 billion in 2015 to about $1 billion today. Trott is now advising Redstone on a potential sale of National Amusements."
How Paramount Became a Cautionary Tale of the Streaming Wars
Shari Redstone inherited her father’s storied media empire and tried to take on Netflix. Now it’s looking for a buyer.
By Lucas Shaw
February 16, 2024 at 5:00 AM CST
"Sumner Redstone was a buyer, not a seller. Starting in the mid-1980s, he built his family’s movie theater chain into one of the world’s most valuable media companies, Viacom, through high-profile acquisitions. He outmaneuvered peers to acquire a legendary broadcast network (CBS), an iconic studio (Paramount Pictures) and popular cable channels (Nickelodeon and MTV).
Redstone relished his Hollywood lifestyle. He attended premieres, cycled through young girlfriends and hosted stars at his Los Angeles mansion. He couldn’t imagine surrendering any part of his company. In 2016, when then-Chief Executive Officer Philippe Dauman tried to sell a minority stake of Paramount studio—the company was struggling, and he was trying to raise money—the 93-year-old Redstone ousted Dauman, his longtime lawyer and protégé, from the company. “Viacom is at the center of my life,” Redstone, a lawyer himself, wrote in his memoir, A Passion to Win. “It is my world.”
Redstone died in 2020. Unfortunately for his heirs, the foundation on which he built his world—movies and cable TV—is crumbling. The number of people who pay for live-TV service has dropped about 30 million from its peak of more than 100 million starting in 2010; meanwhile, domestic moviegoing has plummeted to all-time lows. Redstone’s TV networks have been hit especially hard because their primary audience, viewers under the age of 34, have all but abandoned cable for Netflix, TikTok and YouTube. The company, now known as Paramount Global, has tried to offset the damage by cutting costs. But the lack of investment has only accelerated the loss of viewers and advertisers. Paramount’s TV ad sales are projected to have fallen $1 billion last year.
Sumner’s daughter, Shari, who took over for her father as chairman, thought that streaming would save the company. She’s spent billions of dollars on original series for its flagship service, Paramount+, producing spinoffs of hit shows such as Yellowstone and expanding the Star Trek universe. Yet all that spending hasn’t attracted a large audience. Paramount+ accounted for less than 1% of TV viewing in November, behind not only Netflix and Hulu but also Peacock, the Roku Channel and Tubi. Paramount’s streaming business is projected to have lost about $1.5 billion in 2023, dragging down earnings for the entire company. (Paramount has said that its losses likely peaked last year.)
Paramount isn’t the only traditional media player that doesn’t exactly have a success story to tell these days. The collapse of cable TV and the rise of streaming have wreaked havoc on the entertainment business, prompting widespread layoffs, two labor strikes and consolidation. “The whole industry is guilty of mistakes,” says Rich Greenfield, an analyst with LightShed Partners, a tech, media and telecommunications research company. Even Walt Disney Co., the mightiest of the entertainment giants, has had to fire thousands of employees and slash billions of dollars from its programming budget.
Although “you can’t singularly penalize” Paramount in such a tumultuous media moment, Greenfield says, the company has a smaller margin for error than most of its peers. Disney has lucrative theme parks, and Warner Bros. Discovery Inc. owns the largest TV studio, but Paramount made all its profit last year from traditional TV networks, according to projections—which is why Wall Street has all but given up hope. The company’s market capitalization has plunged below $9 billion, less than a third of what it was five years ago. With more than $16 billion in debt and little cash coming in, Paramount has had to slash the dividend it pays to National Amusements Inc., the Redstones’ holding company. Paramount’s decline has also forced Shari Redstone to contemplate what her father would never: a sale of the family business.
For the past several months, Redstone has been conducting an informal auction, according to more than a dozen interviews with people involved in the process, such as current and former employees, financial advisers and bidders. She’s held discussions about selling control of Paramount to suitors including budding media mogul David Ellison, private equity firm Apollo Global Management Inc. and Warner Bros. Discovery, home to HBO and CNN. Former stand-up comedian Byron Allen has made two separate bids for Paramount, the first of which the company rejected. There’s still a pretty good chance no deal will happen; high interest rates and a federal government that’s wary of mergers both stand in the way, as does Paramount’s sinking share price.
If Redstone can’t find a solution, the company will be in danger of becoming an industry stalwart whose downfall exposes the deterioration of an entire sector. Paramount’s decline jeopardizes the future of its namesake studio, an almost 112-year-old institution that released The Godfather, Grease and Titanic. It also imperils CBS News, the home of Edward R. Murrow, Walter Cronkite and 60 Minutes. MTV, Nickelodeon and Comedy Central, which raised generations of kids, are already afterthoughts to anyone born this century.
The company’s troubles are also a warning sign for Hollywood, which looked to avoid the fate of newspapers, magazines and music—industries ravaged by the internet. But as media companies struggle to transition from cable to streaming, they’re surrendering the next generation of TV viewers to short-form video apps and services that tech giants in Silicon Valley and China own. So far, Hollywood has relied on restructuring and layoffs rather than innovation and growth, leading to questions about whether we’re in the last great age of TV."
Sumner Redstone split CBS from Viacom in 2006. He thought it would benefit the latter: Cable was booming—investors liked niche networks—and broadcast was seen as slow-growing and a drag on the stock. Shari opposed the move, one of several disagreements that prompted her to strike out on her own. After starting a venture capital company, among other projects, she returned to the family fold when she worried that two younger paramours were taking advantage of her father; she eventually ejected them from the family home. Redstone then spent years battling Dauman and then-CBS CEO Leslie Moonves (who didn’t want her meddling in his business) for control of her family’s two big media companies.
When Shari reunited CBS and Viacom in 2019, most media executives said it was too little too late. Netflix Inc. and Amazon.com Inc. were already spending billions of dollars annually on original programming and had built streaming services with global audiences. (Dauman had spent more than $15 billion buying back Viacom stock rather than investing in the company’s future.) Facing this onslaught from Silicon Valley, some moguls decided to cash in rather than compete. Rupert Murdoch sold most of Fox’s entertainment assets to Disney. Jeff Bewkes sold Time Warner Inc. to AT&T Inc. But Redstone, a lawyer who was as pugnacious as her father was, was in no mood to surrender.
“There was a window during which she could have pursued a merger or sale,” says one former executive, who declined to be identified because of confidentiality clauses in their exit agreement. Netflix inquired about buying Paramount Pictures in 2019 and again in more recent years. “Shari was hesitant,” the executive adds. “She had inherited this legacy.”
Instead, Redstone decided to go all-in on streaming. On their own, neither CBS nor Viacom had the scale to compete with Netflix. Viacom had no paid streaming service and had licensed two of its most popular titles, Yellowstone and South Park, to rival services. CBS had All Access and Showtime, two niche services. But the combined company owned more than 140,000 TV episodes and 3,600 movies; it was the home of NCIS, SpongeBob SquarePants and Star Trek and had rights to the NFL. Surely, Redstone thought, that would be enough.
Crafting the streaming strategy fell to Bob Bakish, a former management consultant who joined Viacom in the late 1990s. Bakish had overseen the company’s international operations and was relatively unknown in US media. But with the executive ranks of both her companies hollowed out, Redstone thought Bakish—strategic, practical and, most important, loyal—was the right fit for CEO.
Bakish had the mandate to build a streaming service, but he didn’t have the balance sheet to pay for it. The merger created a company with $19 billion in debt. To raise money, Bakish sold real estate, including the famed CBS headquarters in New York, and tried to sell book publisher Simon & Schuster. (The government blocked the sale to a competitor but later approved a deal at a lower price to private equity firm Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co.) He also cut costs at the company’s cable networks, gutting executive teams and programming budgets.
In 2021, Redstone and Bakish unveiled Paramount+, their answer to Netflix. The service included original movies from Paramount, a reboot of MTV’s The Real World and spinoffs of Yellowstone. Bakish advertised Paramount+ as a “mountain of entertainment,” a play on the snowy peak in the Paramount logo. The service arrived months after similar offerings from Disney, Apple Inc. and Comcast Corp., companies that dwarfed Paramount in sales and profit.
Paramount+ defied skeptics by growing more quickly than anyone anticipated. Despite its late start, the service amassed more than 50 million customers—and was adding more people in the US than any competitor. (This is still true.) Paramount’s other streaming service, Pluto TV, was growing even more quickly. Bakish had acquired the free, ad-supported business, which has hundreds of niche live channels, for only $340 million in 2019, and it was now worth billions. “The strategy we have is indisputably working,” he told Bloomberg News in September 2022. That year, Paramount released the highest-grossing movie in company history, Top Gun: Maverick, at the same time it had the most-watched drama on cable, Yellowstone.
But the company’s investment in Paramount+ couldn’t have had worse timing. It had started adding millions of customers just as rising inflation and a war in Ukraine changed how Wall Street evaluated companies. Fast growth and losses were out; profit was in. Making matters worse, Netflix’s growth stalled at the start of 2022, causing investors to worry that streaming had peaked. Whereas Netflix had spent years building toward profitability, most other companies were trying to replicate its success within an accelerated time frame. Streaming growth across the industry slowed right when companies were experiencing their worst losses.
As Paramount’s stock languished, David Nevins saw an opportunity. The former head of Showtime thought he should’ve been put in charge of programming strategy for Paramount+, given his role in creating hit shows such as Billions, Dexter and Weeds. But Bakish didn’t think Nevins’ tastes were broad enough. The company’s biggest hits were shows such as Blue Bloods and Yellowstone, not Showtime dramas. Bakish instead split oversight among multiple executives, including Nevins, who left at the end of 2022. Now on the outside, he put together financing to try to buy Showtime.
Teaming up with private equity firm General Atlantic, he offered more than $3 billion for his old network. Given Paramount’s need for cash, this seemed a no-brainer to Nevins and his financial advisers. Paramount rebuffed the offer, claiming Showtime was worth at least $5 billion. Some board members thought Paramount should take the money, but Bakish convinced them he could make more by milking Showtime for cash and folding it into Paramount+. He also had another deal in the works. He wanted to sell BET.
A touchstone of the Black community, Black Entertainment Television LLC had its own studio and a streaming service partly owned by filmmaker Tyler Perry. But it was missing out on ad dollars because it was owned by a White family, according to several people who spoke to Bloomberg Businessweek; industry experts told Bakish that advertisers would spend more money on BET if it could say it’s a Black-owned business. So he got a who’s who of Black media figures to bid, including Perry, Sean “Diddy” Combs and Allen. Bids topped $2 billion, but Paramount refused to sell for less than $3 billion. After rejecting the offer for Showtime and failing to sell BET, many Paramount employees and even some board members questioned Bakish’s handling of the sales. “We got an unsolicited offer for Showtime [from Nevins]. We looked at it. And the reality is it wasn’t that interesting to us,” Bakish said last year. (He hasn’t addressed the BET negotiations.) Paramount has been holding talks of late to sell BET to Scott Mills, its current CEO, along with outside investors.
Redstone’s doubts ran deeper. Paramount’s woes had forced the company to slash the dividend it pays to shareholders, thereby creating financial problems for her family. National Amusements relied on the cash infusions from Paramount to sustain its chain of struggling movie theaters and to pay off its debt. Last May, National Amusements raised $125 million by selling a stake to an investment firm founded by computer billionaire Michael Dell and investment banker Byron Trott. “What they’ve done to the balance sheet by competing with Netflix has created real financial problems,” LightShed’s Greenfield says. The value of the Redstone family’s stake in its media companies has dwindled from more than $5 billion in 2015 to about $1 billion today. Trott is now advising Redstone on a potential sale of National Amusements."
wabbott
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2021
- Messages
- 6,458
continued:
"Redstone’s desire to extricate herself from her shrinking media empire increased after Oct. 7, the day Hamas killed about 1,200 Israelis and foreigners and kidnapped hundreds more, precipitating an Israeli invasion of Gaza. “Ever since Oct. 7, my life has been turned upside down,” she said at an event hosted by entertainment industry publication TheWrap in December. She expressed fear for her safety, the survival of Israel and the future of the Jewish people, adding that she’s using her platform to educate people about these issues. “Now it’s all I think about 24 hours a day, and it’s what motivates me from the minute I wake up to the second I go to bed.”
After years of avoiding overtures to buy the company, Redstone has finally been willing to listen. David Ellison, the CEO of Skydance Media, has been drawn to Paramount Pictures since he arrived in Hollywood as a twentysomething with dreams of making movies. Few titles affected him as much as Paramount’s Top Gun. He watched the film on VHS tapes, laser discs and DVDs; it motivated him to become a pilot, and his love of aviation inspired the name of his company. Skydance has been in business with Paramount for 15 years, co-financing and producing many of its biggest movies. Ellison worked with Paramount on the Oscar-nominated True Grit and Brad Pitt’s World War Z, and his studio is now a major stakeholder in many of Paramount’s most valuable franchises, including Mission: Impossible and Star Trek. He also produced Top Gun: Maverick.
Ellison has been expanding his business into animation with former Pixar Animation Studios boss John Lasseter and sports through docuseries deals with the NFL. Skydance raised $400 million in 2022 from investors including private equity firms RedBird Capital Partners and KKR. Recently the 41-year-old recruited his dad, tech billionaire Larry Ellison, and these investors to make a preliminary offer for National Amusements. It would give him control of Paramount, letting him merge it with Skydance—and vaulting him into the upper echelon of media moguls.
Even though Redstone has spent time with Ellison and his father, she’s been less welcoming toward Byron Allen, who’s assembled an unlikely media business combining the Weather Channel with local TV stations. Allen has tried and failed to buy several big-ticket items in recent years, including the Denver Broncos, the ABC broadcast network and BET. Investors have often questioned whether Allen had financing to seal these deals. He’s said Paramount turned him down because the company thought it could get more money. Paramount has declined to comment on Allen’s—or anyone’s—bids.
Those close to Redstone tell Businessweek there are other bidders at the table, though they declined to name them. Private equity firms have looked at Paramount but not bid on their own. High interest rates make it expensive to finance the takeover of a multibillion-dollar media company. Fellow media companies such as Warner Bros. Discovery and Comcast have also looked. Warner Bros. Discovery CEO David Zaslav has spoken with Redstone and Bakish and hired financial advisers to work on a potential bid. But the current regulatory climate would likely result in years of litigation and headaches for Zaslav. He would have to be sure this was the right deal to position his company for the future.
Executives close to the negotiations say there’s about a 50% chance a deal happens. Because Redstone is attempting to sell control of Paramount through her family holding company (among other scenarios), any deal is also more complicated because she’ll expect her controlling shares to be valued higher than those of common shareholders. Warren Buffett, Paramount’s largest shareholder, has said nothing about the talks. Investor Mario Gabelli, another major shareholder, has expressed concerns about a deal.
Many buyers say they can wait a year or two for the value of the company to drop further. Redstone’s cable networks are only going to decline more and will face financial pressure from pay-TV operators such as Charter Communications Inc., which has forced other media companies to drop certain channels from their cable packages that don’t perform well with subscribers. Her streaming service is still years away from meaningful profits—there’s a reason Paramount promoted it so aggressively during the Super Bowl—and has a limited footprint outside the US. “It is hard to see how a buyer creates value unless Paramount stock first falls toward the mid-single digits,” Greenfield wrote in a note on Jan. 25. Shares are currently trading at about $13.
Some analysts, including Greenfield, have called for Paramount to shut down its streaming service and become a pure studio, selling its top shows to other streamers. This move would require Paramount to fire thousands of employees, a fate Redstone would rather avoid. She wants to find a new owner who will preserve her father’s legacy, investing in the business rather than breaking it up for parts. But Sumner was a buyer at the beginning of the cable boom, and his daughter is a seller at its end. And if she can’t make a deal, her alternatives are bleak. This week Paramount said it would cut about 800 jobs—at least the fourth time in the past 18 months that the company has downsized."
"Redstone’s desire to extricate herself from her shrinking media empire increased after Oct. 7, the day Hamas killed about 1,200 Israelis and foreigners and kidnapped hundreds more, precipitating an Israeli invasion of Gaza. “Ever since Oct. 7, my life has been turned upside down,” she said at an event hosted by entertainment industry publication TheWrap in December. She expressed fear for her safety, the survival of Israel and the future of the Jewish people, adding that she’s using her platform to educate people about these issues. “Now it’s all I think about 24 hours a day, and it’s what motivates me from the minute I wake up to the second I go to bed.”
After years of avoiding overtures to buy the company, Redstone has finally been willing to listen. David Ellison, the CEO of Skydance Media, has been drawn to Paramount Pictures since he arrived in Hollywood as a twentysomething with dreams of making movies. Few titles affected him as much as Paramount’s Top Gun. He watched the film on VHS tapes, laser discs and DVDs; it motivated him to become a pilot, and his love of aviation inspired the name of his company. Skydance has been in business with Paramount for 15 years, co-financing and producing many of its biggest movies. Ellison worked with Paramount on the Oscar-nominated True Grit and Brad Pitt’s World War Z, and his studio is now a major stakeholder in many of Paramount’s most valuable franchises, including Mission: Impossible and Star Trek. He also produced Top Gun: Maverick.
Ellison has been expanding his business into animation with former Pixar Animation Studios boss John Lasseter and sports through docuseries deals with the NFL. Skydance raised $400 million in 2022 from investors including private equity firms RedBird Capital Partners and KKR. Recently the 41-year-old recruited his dad, tech billionaire Larry Ellison, and these investors to make a preliminary offer for National Amusements. It would give him control of Paramount, letting him merge it with Skydance—and vaulting him into the upper echelon of media moguls.
Even though Redstone has spent time with Ellison and his father, she’s been less welcoming toward Byron Allen, who’s assembled an unlikely media business combining the Weather Channel with local TV stations. Allen has tried and failed to buy several big-ticket items in recent years, including the Denver Broncos, the ABC broadcast network and BET. Investors have often questioned whether Allen had financing to seal these deals. He’s said Paramount turned him down because the company thought it could get more money. Paramount has declined to comment on Allen’s—or anyone’s—bids.
Those close to Redstone tell Businessweek there are other bidders at the table, though they declined to name them. Private equity firms have looked at Paramount but not bid on their own. High interest rates make it expensive to finance the takeover of a multibillion-dollar media company. Fellow media companies such as Warner Bros. Discovery and Comcast have also looked. Warner Bros. Discovery CEO David Zaslav has spoken with Redstone and Bakish and hired financial advisers to work on a potential bid. But the current regulatory climate would likely result in years of litigation and headaches for Zaslav. He would have to be sure this was the right deal to position his company for the future.
Executives close to the negotiations say there’s about a 50% chance a deal happens. Because Redstone is attempting to sell control of Paramount through her family holding company (among other scenarios), any deal is also more complicated because she’ll expect her controlling shares to be valued higher than those of common shareholders. Warren Buffett, Paramount’s largest shareholder, has said nothing about the talks. Investor Mario Gabelli, another major shareholder, has expressed concerns about a deal.
Many buyers say they can wait a year or two for the value of the company to drop further. Redstone’s cable networks are only going to decline more and will face financial pressure from pay-TV operators such as Charter Communications Inc., which has forced other media companies to drop certain channels from their cable packages that don’t perform well with subscribers. Her streaming service is still years away from meaningful profits—there’s a reason Paramount promoted it so aggressively during the Super Bowl—and has a limited footprint outside the US. “It is hard to see how a buyer creates value unless Paramount stock first falls toward the mid-single digits,” Greenfield wrote in a note on Jan. 25. Shares are currently trading at about $13.
Some analysts, including Greenfield, have called for Paramount to shut down its streaming service and become a pure studio, selling its top shows to other streamers. This move would require Paramount to fire thousands of employees, a fate Redstone would rather avoid. She wants to find a new owner who will preserve her father’s legacy, investing in the business rather than breaking it up for parts. But Sumner was a buyer at the beginning of the cable boom, and his daughter is a seller at its end. And if she can’t make a deal, her alternatives are bleak. This week Paramount said it would cut about 800 jobs—at least the fourth time in the past 18 months that the company has downsized."
wabbott
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2021
- Messages
- 6,458
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/roku-stock-earnings-q4-1235829747/
Why Roku Stock Is On the Rocks
The tech firm faces increasing competition on the streaming advertising side, as Netflix and Disney grow ad tiers and Pluto and Tubi offer free services, and may get a new rival on the smart TV-manufacturer front.
February 19, 2024 - 9:49am PST
by Caitlin Huston
Despite a fourth-quarter earnings beat, growing engagement on the streaming platform to 80 million active accounts, Roku’s stock tumbled more than 20 percent a day after the Feb. 15 earnings announcement.
While some analysts continue to believe Roku is just facing some growing pains, amid a recovering advertising market, others think the company is now at a turning point in the streaming wars.
“Recently, we believe that there is a strong and growing body of evidence that supports the view that Roku is at the precipice of being squeezed by the emergence of challengers on all flanks,” MoffettNathanson analyst Michael Nathanson wrote.
This view comes as Roku faces increasing competition on the streaming advertising side, with growth in the new ad-supported offerings from Netflix and Disney and free, ad-supported offerings such as Pluto and Tubi. Amazon’s roll-out of advertising in late January to all of its Prime Video viewers adds another strong competitor.
Roku introduced its own line of branded TVs in 2023, as a way to handle the shift from devices to smart TVs, but Nathanson said he believes Roku now faces the “difficulty of holding operating market share” with Amazon and existing large original equipment manufacturers that may just want to make the TVs themselves.
And a new potential competitor could be on the horizon, with the rumored acquisition of Vizio by Walmart. The Wall Street Journal reported on Feb. 13 that the retail giant and the smart TV-manufacturer had held talks, setting up the potential for an advertising and manufacturing behemoth.
“If indeed Walmart is successful in acquiring Vizio, we would expect that their unrivaled relationship with the world’s largest brands and their treasure trove of shopping data will also present a significant challenge to Roku’s incumbency,” Nathanson said.
Though he said that he could not comment on a rumor, Roku CEO Anthony Wood said during the company’s earnings call that he believes Roku remains well-positioned in the space, even with the potential new entrant.
“We have a great relationship with Walmart. We have a great relationship with lots of retailers. We have strong distribution both inside and outside the United States. We have a large, engaged customer base,” Wood said.
While acknowledging “near-term challenges in the macro environment and an uneven ad market recovery,” Wood also emphasized plans to grow revenue and cash flow at the company over time and to turn 2024 into a year of “innovation and growth.” Some analysts are holding to that promise, and still view Roku as an early leader and innovator in the streaming space. However, as noted by Macquarie analyst Tim Nollen, morale has taken a hit.
“Roku is well positioned as the US device share leader to capture CTV ad dollars, underpinned by continued strong engagement metrics. Performance has been mixed for many Qs now, however, dampening enthusiasm somewhat,” he wrote in a Feb. 16 note.
Why Roku Stock Is On the Rocks
The tech firm faces increasing competition on the streaming advertising side, as Netflix and Disney grow ad tiers and Pluto and Tubi offer free services, and may get a new rival on the smart TV-manufacturer front.
February 19, 2024 - 9:49am PST
by Caitlin Huston
Despite a fourth-quarter earnings beat, growing engagement on the streaming platform to 80 million active accounts, Roku’s stock tumbled more than 20 percent a day after the Feb. 15 earnings announcement.
While some analysts continue to believe Roku is just facing some growing pains, amid a recovering advertising market, others think the company is now at a turning point in the streaming wars.
“Recently, we believe that there is a strong and growing body of evidence that supports the view that Roku is at the precipice of being squeezed by the emergence of challengers on all flanks,” MoffettNathanson analyst Michael Nathanson wrote.
This view comes as Roku faces increasing competition on the streaming advertising side, with growth in the new ad-supported offerings from Netflix and Disney and free, ad-supported offerings such as Pluto and Tubi. Amazon’s roll-out of advertising in late January to all of its Prime Video viewers adds another strong competitor.
Roku introduced its own line of branded TVs in 2023, as a way to handle the shift from devices to smart TVs, but Nathanson said he believes Roku now faces the “difficulty of holding operating market share” with Amazon and existing large original equipment manufacturers that may just want to make the TVs themselves.
And a new potential competitor could be on the horizon, with the rumored acquisition of Vizio by Walmart. The Wall Street Journal reported on Feb. 13 that the retail giant and the smart TV-manufacturer had held talks, setting up the potential for an advertising and manufacturing behemoth.
“If indeed Walmart is successful in acquiring Vizio, we would expect that their unrivaled relationship with the world’s largest brands and their treasure trove of shopping data will also present a significant challenge to Roku’s incumbency,” Nathanson said.
Though he said that he could not comment on a rumor, Roku CEO Anthony Wood said during the company’s earnings call that he believes Roku remains well-positioned in the space, even with the potential new entrant.
“We have a great relationship with Walmart. We have a great relationship with lots of retailers. We have strong distribution both inside and outside the United States. We have a large, engaged customer base,” Wood said.
While acknowledging “near-term challenges in the macro environment and an uneven ad market recovery,” Wood also emphasized plans to grow revenue and cash flow at the company over time and to turn 2024 into a year of “innovation and growth.” Some analysts are holding to that promise, and still view Roku as an early leader and innovator in the streaming space. However, as noted by Macquarie analyst Tim Nollen, morale has taken a hit.
“Roku is well positioned as the US device share leader to capture CTV ad dollars, underpinned by continued strong engagement metrics. Performance has been mixed for many Qs now, however, dampening enthusiasm somewhat,” he wrote in a Feb. 16 note.
wabbott
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2021
- Messages
- 6,458
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/b...tent-licensing-renaissance-ampere-1235829555/
Why Disney Is Seen as the “Big Winner in the Licensing Renaissance”
"Disney trumps all the other major studios with its ownership of powerful licensable content, owning more than double that of its rivals," says Ampere Analysis in a new report.
by Georg Szalai - Global Business Editor
February 19, 2024 - 8:54am PST
Disney is “set to be the big winner in the licensing renaissance” as Hollywood giants look to make revenue from their content beyond using it on their own streaming services, according to a new study.
“Disney trumps all the other major studios with its ownership of powerful licensable content, owning more than double that of its rivals,” research firm Ampere Analysis explained in a report published Monday. “After four years of major studios employing a walled-garden approach to the distribution of their TV content on streaming, licensing is steadily making a comeback.”
It added: “Studios were understandably reluctant to give up exclusivity for major franchises as they built their streaming services. But Warner Bros. Discovery‘s 2023 deals to license recently released DC-adapted content to Amazon, Netflix and Tubi demonstrate that even strategies around exclusivity for core IP are now changing.”
Ampere’s analysis found that the number of TV seasons cross-licensed between Netflix and Warner Bros. Discovery’s Max and Discovery+ more than tripled in 2023, while Amazon’s overlap with studios’ streamers also grew “significantly.” The firm also noted “recent major deals” involving the likes of NBCUniversal and Disney.
Ampere formulated a “licensing power ranking” and analyzed Hollywood conglomerates’ content catalogs “to identify the number of titles currently held back that meet these criteria.”
The company identified titles with “licensing power,” which fulfill the following criteria: “they have completed their first run, have at least three seasons, are scripted, of U.S.-origin, and still maintain consumer engagement measured with Ampere’s Popularity Score,” a metric that reflects the online engagement for each title every month.
Disney holds the most titles with licensing power, owning 148 that were still exclusive to its own streaming services as of December 2023, Ampere concluded, describing this as “a potential licensing cache more than double the size of any other major Hollywood studio.” Among these shows are the likes of Sons of Anarchy and Buffy the Vampire Slayer, the firm said.
Paramount Global has 72 titles with licensing power in the back pocket, including Hawaii Five-0 and Star Trek: The Next Generation, Warner Bros. Discovery has 54, including The Sopranos and The Wire, and NBCUniversal has 47, including The Office and Law & Order: Criminal Intent, according to the Ampere analysis.
The research firm also looked at the available programming in terms of genre. Across major studios’ titles with licensing power, “comedy is the most common genre, accounting for 25 percent,” it explained. “This is driven by U.S. audiences’ continued interest in a host of locally produced long-running sitcoms. Many of these ended their run long ago (including The Office, The Golden Girls and Seinfeld) but some are more recent hits (such as Brooklyn Nine-Nine).”
Ampere highlighted though that “not all identified titles with licensing power will necessarily be cross-licensed.” For example, six of the 20 most popular titles in Paramount Global’s vault are part of the Star Trek franchise.
That said, the success of Suits on Netflix has been widely noted in Hollywood and on Wall Street. “Several recent examples of titles that have seen a huge boost in popularity following transmission in a second window suggest that studios should seek licensing partners (like NBCUniversal’s Suits on Netflix) with the largest userbase and the smallest audience overlap,” Ampere wrote.
“We expect more licensing deals for high-profile titles to be struck in 2024 between major VOD providers,” said Rahul Patel, research manager at Ampere. “Studios’ strategies will need to carefully balance exclusivity and non-exclusivity to ensure their streaming offerings are distinct and compelling while also maximizing the value of their content as it moves to a second window. Licensing can expand the audience for existing assets, extend shelf life and at the more successful end of the scale, inspire franchise expansion. This was the case with NBCUniversal when it commissioned a Suits spinoff following its success on Netflix.”
Why Disney Is Seen as the “Big Winner in the Licensing Renaissance”
"Disney trumps all the other major studios with its ownership of powerful licensable content, owning more than double that of its rivals," says Ampere Analysis in a new report.
by Georg Szalai - Global Business Editor
February 19, 2024 - 8:54am PST
Disney is “set to be the big winner in the licensing renaissance” as Hollywood giants look to make revenue from their content beyond using it on their own streaming services, according to a new study.
“Disney trumps all the other major studios with its ownership of powerful licensable content, owning more than double that of its rivals,” research firm Ampere Analysis explained in a report published Monday. “After four years of major studios employing a walled-garden approach to the distribution of their TV content on streaming, licensing is steadily making a comeback.”
It added: “Studios were understandably reluctant to give up exclusivity for major franchises as they built their streaming services. But Warner Bros. Discovery‘s 2023 deals to license recently released DC-adapted content to Amazon, Netflix and Tubi demonstrate that even strategies around exclusivity for core IP are now changing.”
Ampere’s analysis found that the number of TV seasons cross-licensed between Netflix and Warner Bros. Discovery’s Max and Discovery+ more than tripled in 2023, while Amazon’s overlap with studios’ streamers also grew “significantly.” The firm also noted “recent major deals” involving the likes of NBCUniversal and Disney.
Ampere formulated a “licensing power ranking” and analyzed Hollywood conglomerates’ content catalogs “to identify the number of titles currently held back that meet these criteria.”
The company identified titles with “licensing power,” which fulfill the following criteria: “they have completed their first run, have at least three seasons, are scripted, of U.S.-origin, and still maintain consumer engagement measured with Ampere’s Popularity Score,” a metric that reflects the online engagement for each title every month.
Disney holds the most titles with licensing power, owning 148 that were still exclusive to its own streaming services as of December 2023, Ampere concluded, describing this as “a potential licensing cache more than double the size of any other major Hollywood studio.” Among these shows are the likes of Sons of Anarchy and Buffy the Vampire Slayer, the firm said.
Paramount Global has 72 titles with licensing power in the back pocket, including Hawaii Five-0 and Star Trek: The Next Generation, Warner Bros. Discovery has 54, including The Sopranos and The Wire, and NBCUniversal has 47, including The Office and Law & Order: Criminal Intent, according to the Ampere analysis.
The research firm also looked at the available programming in terms of genre. Across major studios’ titles with licensing power, “comedy is the most common genre, accounting for 25 percent,” it explained. “This is driven by U.S. audiences’ continued interest in a host of locally produced long-running sitcoms. Many of these ended their run long ago (including The Office, The Golden Girls and Seinfeld) but some are more recent hits (such as Brooklyn Nine-Nine).”
Ampere highlighted though that “not all identified titles with licensing power will necessarily be cross-licensed.” For example, six of the 20 most popular titles in Paramount Global’s vault are part of the Star Trek franchise.
That said, the success of Suits on Netflix has been widely noted in Hollywood and on Wall Street. “Several recent examples of titles that have seen a huge boost in popularity following transmission in a second window suggest that studios should seek licensing partners (like NBCUniversal’s Suits on Netflix) with the largest userbase and the smallest audience overlap,” Ampere wrote.
“We expect more licensing deals for high-profile titles to be struck in 2024 between major VOD providers,” said Rahul Patel, research manager at Ampere. “Studios’ strategies will need to carefully balance exclusivity and non-exclusivity to ensure their streaming offerings are distinct and compelling while also maximizing the value of their content as it moves to a second window. Licensing can expand the audience for existing assets, extend shelf life and at the more successful end of the scale, inspire franchise expansion. This was the case with NBCUniversal when it commissioned a Suits spinoff following its success on Netflix.”
wabbott
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2021
- Messages
- 6,458
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/moana-2-jumped-streaming-theaters-140000282.html
How ‘Moana 2’ Jumped From Streaming to Theaters — And Could Help Disney Animation Rebound
Jeremy Fuster
Tue, February 20, 2024 at 8:00 AM CST
During its first quarter earnings call earlier this month, Disney announced that the next animated film it will bring to theaters on Thanksgiving will be the sequel to its 2016 hit “Moana,” signaling a renewed push on sequels after years of original animated titles.
But “Moana 2” was originally announced in 2020, under short-lived CEO Bob Chapek, as a streaming series exclusive to Disney+. This change underscores a shifting strategy by Disney and other studios to move films previously planned for streaming to the big screen — in part to calm jittery investors nervous about the thin pipeline of tentpole movies after the Hollywood strikes.
The “Moana 2” re-direct follows Paramount’s “Mean Girls” and “Smile,” and Warner Bros./New Line’s “Evil Dead Rise,” all theatrical releases that were originally intended to be streaming-only.
“Studios are showing that when they see signs of high quality in a project they greenlit for streaming… they’re moving them back to theaters to take advantage of the full life cycle of revenue that only a theatrical release can provide,” said Boxoffice editor Daniel Loria.
The move is just one example of how CEO Bob Iger is shifting Disney’s strategy away from his one-time successor’s plans, as the entertainment giant struggles with a sluggish stock price and restless investors concerned about Disney’s declining linear TV assets and poorly performing franchise films. And it appears to be working, as Disney’s stock price has since responded with a 13% bump.
The switch was set in motion a few months ago, when Disney execs started getting a look at nearly finished episodes of the long-developing “Moana” series. The episodes, written and directed by David G. Derrick Jr. and animated at Walt Disney Animation Studios’ Canadian satellite studio, got a big thumbs up. Iger noted on the company’s earnings call last week that some at the studio thought it could be better than the movie. Soon, a plan was hatched: Could the episodes be combined into a single theatrical experience?
“We were impressed with what we saw, and we knew it deserved a theatrical release,” Iger said. “The original ‘Moana’ film from 2016 recently crossed 1 billion hours streamed on Disney+ and was the most-streamed movie of 2023 on any platform in the U.S.”
Disney wrestled with the concept, keeping the Thanksgiving 2024 release date open in case one of its other projects, like “Zootopia 2,” was further along. But soon it became apparent that the slot needed to go to this “Moana” follow-up.
Leaning into familiar IP
Given the multiyear development process that comes with any animated project, Disney isn’t pivoting back to sequels in direct response to box office trends. Releasing “Moana 2” this November — and giving Thanksgiving 2025 to a sequel to the billion-dollar hit “Zootopia” — not only aligns with the dominance of familiar IP in the family film space but also with Disney’s plans in other parts of the company.
“Given the environment and given what it takes to get people out of their homes to see a film … leaning on franchises that are familiar is actually a smart thing,” Iger said.
Since theaters reopened in spring 2021, the animated films that have been the biggest hits were IP-driven, whether it is Illumination’s “The Super Mario Bros. Movie” ($1.36 billion at the global box office) and “Minions: The Rise of Gru” ($940 million) or Sony Pictures Animation’s “Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse” (a studio record $690.8 million).
On the original side, the only post-shutdown release to make any sort of significant impact on the box office was Pixar’s “Elemental,” a film that struggled to gain much pre-release buzz and suffered the worst opening weekend in Pixar history, only to recover spectacularly thanks to excellent word-of-mouth. It went on to gross $497 million worldwide.
Beyond the Oscar-nominated “Elemental,” Disney Animation has seen its last two original films, “Strange World” ($73.6 million worldwide) and “Wish,” ($246.6 million), crash after tepid reviews and poor results from their respective Thanksgiving releases. Other studios haven’t done much better. DreamWorks saw “Ruby Gillman: Teenage Kraken” bomb even harder ($45.5 million) while Illumination’s holiday 2023 film “Migration” ($235.7 million) did decently against its $90 million budget but fell well short of the $481.6 million that the DreamWorks holiday 2022 sequel “Puss in Boots: The Last Wish” grossed.
It’s difficult to say how some of Disney’s well-received original films would have done if they had gotten full theatrical releases rather than a shortened run prior to a holiday Disney+ release, like “Encanto” in 2021. Or if they had skipped theaters entirely, like Pixar’s “Turning Red” in 2022.
But with Universal supplanting Disney as the studio providing the biggest theatrical draws among families in 2023, Iger’s team is looking to the beloved characters it introduced in the 2010s like Moana, Maui and Nick Wilde to restore its standing in a more competitive animated market.
Trickle-down impacts
And if it does, the riches will extend well beyond ticket sales. Disney’s theme park division is heavily investing in new “Moana” and “Zootopia” themed experiences, including a recently opened “Moana” ride at EPCOT in Orlando and an entire “Zootopia” section at Shanghai Disney Resort. Should the sequels be as well received by families as their 2016 predecessors, it will almost certainly trickle down to increased theme park turnout.
“Look at how much more expensive it is for families to see a movie in theaters than watch it at home. The families who do go to the theaters are more likely to spend money for a trip to Disney’s theme parks,” said Laura Martin, senior media analyst for Needham & Company.
“When Disney has, say, $100 million they’re investing into a major park project, the box office can serve as a voting mechanism, especially with families, as to what franchises they are most interested in and would probably get the most turnout if added to Disneyland or Disney World,” Martin added.
Other revenue streams flow from a theatrical release, like the countless forms of merchandise and toys that launch along with any major family film. Disney was able to create such merch success with some of the films it pivoted to streaming. “Turning Red” in particular got a massive merchandise line when it first hit Disney+.
But Chapek’s plans to push further by launching franchises through streaming exclusives has given way to Iger’s return to tried-and-true theatrical methods.
“Disney got as big as it did from extremely smart windowing, not just theatrically but in home entertainment with limited releases of home video,” Loria said. “Disney+ was their attempt to evolve that, but I never understood why they tried sacrificing theatrical windowing to boost streaming. Even Netflix with their truncated theatrical runs understands that putting films in theaters eventizes them.”
The failure of “Strange World” and the struggle of “Wish” left theaters struggling to make up for what has traditionally been a major start to the winter box office over the last couple of years. If “Moana 2” and “Zootopia 2” can thrive alongside Universal’s two-part adaptation of “Wicked,” exhibitors may finally see its first healthy Thanksgiving box office since the pandemic shut them down.
“This is an opportunity that exhibition hasn’t had in five years,” Loria said. “We’ve seen with ‘Barbie’ and ‘Oppenheimer’ that more than one tentpole can coexist. If two films with different and/or overlapping films perform well together, that’s going to be a big step to getting the market back to pre-pandemic levels.”
The post How ‘Moana 2’ Jumped From Streaming to Theaters — And Could Help Disney Animation Rebound appeared first on TheWrap.
How ‘Moana 2’ Jumped From Streaming to Theaters — And Could Help Disney Animation Rebound
Jeremy Fuster
Tue, February 20, 2024 at 8:00 AM CST
During its first quarter earnings call earlier this month, Disney announced that the next animated film it will bring to theaters on Thanksgiving will be the sequel to its 2016 hit “Moana,” signaling a renewed push on sequels after years of original animated titles.
But “Moana 2” was originally announced in 2020, under short-lived CEO Bob Chapek, as a streaming series exclusive to Disney+. This change underscores a shifting strategy by Disney and other studios to move films previously planned for streaming to the big screen — in part to calm jittery investors nervous about the thin pipeline of tentpole movies after the Hollywood strikes.
The “Moana 2” re-direct follows Paramount’s “Mean Girls” and “Smile,” and Warner Bros./New Line’s “Evil Dead Rise,” all theatrical releases that were originally intended to be streaming-only.
“Studios are showing that when they see signs of high quality in a project they greenlit for streaming… they’re moving them back to theaters to take advantage of the full life cycle of revenue that only a theatrical release can provide,” said Boxoffice editor Daniel Loria.
The move is just one example of how CEO Bob Iger is shifting Disney’s strategy away from his one-time successor’s plans, as the entertainment giant struggles with a sluggish stock price and restless investors concerned about Disney’s declining linear TV assets and poorly performing franchise films. And it appears to be working, as Disney’s stock price has since responded with a 13% bump.
The switch was set in motion a few months ago, when Disney execs started getting a look at nearly finished episodes of the long-developing “Moana” series. The episodes, written and directed by David G. Derrick Jr. and animated at Walt Disney Animation Studios’ Canadian satellite studio, got a big thumbs up. Iger noted on the company’s earnings call last week that some at the studio thought it could be better than the movie. Soon, a plan was hatched: Could the episodes be combined into a single theatrical experience?
“We were impressed with what we saw, and we knew it deserved a theatrical release,” Iger said. “The original ‘Moana’ film from 2016 recently crossed 1 billion hours streamed on Disney+ and was the most-streamed movie of 2023 on any platform in the U.S.”
Disney wrestled with the concept, keeping the Thanksgiving 2024 release date open in case one of its other projects, like “Zootopia 2,” was further along. But soon it became apparent that the slot needed to go to this “Moana” follow-up.
Leaning into familiar IP
Given the multiyear development process that comes with any animated project, Disney isn’t pivoting back to sequels in direct response to box office trends. Releasing “Moana 2” this November — and giving Thanksgiving 2025 to a sequel to the billion-dollar hit “Zootopia” — not only aligns with the dominance of familiar IP in the family film space but also with Disney’s plans in other parts of the company.
“Given the environment and given what it takes to get people out of their homes to see a film … leaning on franchises that are familiar is actually a smart thing,” Iger said.
Since theaters reopened in spring 2021, the animated films that have been the biggest hits were IP-driven, whether it is Illumination’s “The Super Mario Bros. Movie” ($1.36 billion at the global box office) and “Minions: The Rise of Gru” ($940 million) or Sony Pictures Animation’s “Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse” (a studio record $690.8 million).
On the original side, the only post-shutdown release to make any sort of significant impact on the box office was Pixar’s “Elemental,” a film that struggled to gain much pre-release buzz and suffered the worst opening weekend in Pixar history, only to recover spectacularly thanks to excellent word-of-mouth. It went on to gross $497 million worldwide.
Beyond the Oscar-nominated “Elemental,” Disney Animation has seen its last two original films, “Strange World” ($73.6 million worldwide) and “Wish,” ($246.6 million), crash after tepid reviews and poor results from their respective Thanksgiving releases. Other studios haven’t done much better. DreamWorks saw “Ruby Gillman: Teenage Kraken” bomb even harder ($45.5 million) while Illumination’s holiday 2023 film “Migration” ($235.7 million) did decently against its $90 million budget but fell well short of the $481.6 million that the DreamWorks holiday 2022 sequel “Puss in Boots: The Last Wish” grossed.
It’s difficult to say how some of Disney’s well-received original films would have done if they had gotten full theatrical releases rather than a shortened run prior to a holiday Disney+ release, like “Encanto” in 2021. Or if they had skipped theaters entirely, like Pixar’s “Turning Red” in 2022.
But with Universal supplanting Disney as the studio providing the biggest theatrical draws among families in 2023, Iger’s team is looking to the beloved characters it introduced in the 2010s like Moana, Maui and Nick Wilde to restore its standing in a more competitive animated market.
Trickle-down impacts
And if it does, the riches will extend well beyond ticket sales. Disney’s theme park division is heavily investing in new “Moana” and “Zootopia” themed experiences, including a recently opened “Moana” ride at EPCOT in Orlando and an entire “Zootopia” section at Shanghai Disney Resort. Should the sequels be as well received by families as their 2016 predecessors, it will almost certainly trickle down to increased theme park turnout.
“Look at how much more expensive it is for families to see a movie in theaters than watch it at home. The families who do go to the theaters are more likely to spend money for a trip to Disney’s theme parks,” said Laura Martin, senior media analyst for Needham & Company.
“When Disney has, say, $100 million they’re investing into a major park project, the box office can serve as a voting mechanism, especially with families, as to what franchises they are most interested in and would probably get the most turnout if added to Disneyland or Disney World,” Martin added.
Other revenue streams flow from a theatrical release, like the countless forms of merchandise and toys that launch along with any major family film. Disney was able to create such merch success with some of the films it pivoted to streaming. “Turning Red” in particular got a massive merchandise line when it first hit Disney+.
But Chapek’s plans to push further by launching franchises through streaming exclusives has given way to Iger’s return to tried-and-true theatrical methods.
“Disney got as big as it did from extremely smart windowing, not just theatrically but in home entertainment with limited releases of home video,” Loria said. “Disney+ was their attempt to evolve that, but I never understood why they tried sacrificing theatrical windowing to boost streaming. Even Netflix with their truncated theatrical runs understands that putting films in theaters eventizes them.”
The failure of “Strange World” and the struggle of “Wish” left theaters struggling to make up for what has traditionally been a major start to the winter box office over the last couple of years. If “Moana 2” and “Zootopia 2” can thrive alongside Universal’s two-part adaptation of “Wicked,” exhibitors may finally see its first healthy Thanksgiving box office since the pandemic shut them down.
“This is an opportunity that exhibition hasn’t had in five years,” Loria said. “We’ve seen with ‘Barbie’ and ‘Oppenheimer’ that more than one tentpole can coexist. If two films with different and/or overlapping films perform well together, that’s going to be a big step to getting the market back to pre-pandemic levels.”
The post How ‘Moana 2’ Jumped From Streaming to Theaters — And Could Help Disney Animation Rebound appeared first on TheWrap.
wabbott
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2021
- Messages
- 6,458
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/b...ner-fox-sports-streaming-platform-1235830781/
FuboTV Files $1B Lawsuit Seeking to Block Disney, Warners and Fox Sports Streaming Platform
The antitrust lawsuit takes issue with the companies forcing FuboTV to carry expensive non-sports channels.
by Winston Cho
February 20, 2024 - 1:25pm PST
The media giants teaming up on a new platform that will pool together sports streaming rights are facing an antitrust lawsuit from rival sports streamer Fubo, which alleges that it’s being forced to carry dozens of pricey, non-sports channels as a condition of licensing sports rights from the companies in an anticompetitive scheme to stifle competition.
The lawsuit filed in New York federal court on Tuesday under seal names The Walt Disney Co., Fox Corp. and Warner Bros. Discovery and seeks to block the joint venture.
The untitled streaming platform, announced on Feb. 6 and scheduled to launch this fall, will offer live linear channels like ESPN, Fox, ABC, TNT and TBS, as well as games and other sports rights from all three companies on a nonexclusive basis. It will be offered directly to consumers but also as a bundle with WBD’s Max, Disney’s ESPN+ and Hulu.
The suit accuses the media giants of leveraging their “iron grip on sports content to extract billions of dollars in supra-competitive profits,” leading to consumers paying more for highly popular sports content.
According to a release announcing the suit, other examples of behavior that may violate antitrust laws include the media companies charging Fubo content licensing rates that are as much as 50 percent higher than rates they charge other distributors.
“Defendants also impose non-market penetration requirements (the percentage of total subscribers to which a content package must be sold to or cannot exceed) on Fubo,” the company said in a statement. “These actions individually and collectively increase the costs Fubo must pass onto customers. Fubo believes it has incurred billions of dollars in damages as a result of the Defendants’ actions.”
In a statement, Fubo chief executive David Gandler said, “Each of these companies has consistently engaged in anticompetitive practices that aim to monopolize the market, stifle any form of competition, create higher pricing for subscribers and cheat consumers from deserved choice. By joining together to exclusively reserve the rights to distribute a specialized live sports package, we believe these corporations are erecting insurmountable barriers that will effectively block any new competitors from entering the market.”
The day after the announcement, Fubo saw its stock plummet more than 25 percent. It said in a statement issued at the time that “streaming sports ventures rarely work” and that the deal may violate antitrust laws.
It explained, “Every consumer in America should be concerned about the intent behind this joint venture and its impact on fair market competition. This joint venture spotlights a concerning trend where an alliance with significant market share, reportedly controlling 60-85% of all sports content, could dictate market terms in a manner that may not serve the broader interests of consumers.”
Fubo is represented by Joseph Hall of Kellogg, Hansen, Todd, Figel & Frederick. The firm has represented clients across telecommunications in dealings with the Federal Communications Commission, including AT&T and Verizon.
Fox, and WBD did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Disney and ESPN declined to comment
FuboTV Files $1B Lawsuit Seeking to Block Disney, Warners and Fox Sports Streaming Platform
The antitrust lawsuit takes issue with the companies forcing FuboTV to carry expensive non-sports channels.
by Winston Cho
February 20, 2024 - 1:25pm PST
The media giants teaming up on a new platform that will pool together sports streaming rights are facing an antitrust lawsuit from rival sports streamer Fubo, which alleges that it’s being forced to carry dozens of pricey, non-sports channels as a condition of licensing sports rights from the companies in an anticompetitive scheme to stifle competition.
The lawsuit filed in New York federal court on Tuesday under seal names The Walt Disney Co., Fox Corp. and Warner Bros. Discovery and seeks to block the joint venture.
The untitled streaming platform, announced on Feb. 6 and scheduled to launch this fall, will offer live linear channels like ESPN, Fox, ABC, TNT and TBS, as well as games and other sports rights from all three companies on a nonexclusive basis. It will be offered directly to consumers but also as a bundle with WBD’s Max, Disney’s ESPN+ and Hulu.
The suit accuses the media giants of leveraging their “iron grip on sports content to extract billions of dollars in supra-competitive profits,” leading to consumers paying more for highly popular sports content.
According to a release announcing the suit, other examples of behavior that may violate antitrust laws include the media companies charging Fubo content licensing rates that are as much as 50 percent higher than rates they charge other distributors.
“Defendants also impose non-market penetration requirements (the percentage of total subscribers to which a content package must be sold to or cannot exceed) on Fubo,” the company said in a statement. “These actions individually and collectively increase the costs Fubo must pass onto customers. Fubo believes it has incurred billions of dollars in damages as a result of the Defendants’ actions.”
In a statement, Fubo chief executive David Gandler said, “Each of these companies has consistently engaged in anticompetitive practices that aim to monopolize the market, stifle any form of competition, create higher pricing for subscribers and cheat consumers from deserved choice. By joining together to exclusively reserve the rights to distribute a specialized live sports package, we believe these corporations are erecting insurmountable barriers that will effectively block any new competitors from entering the market.”
The day after the announcement, Fubo saw its stock plummet more than 25 percent. It said in a statement issued at the time that “streaming sports ventures rarely work” and that the deal may violate antitrust laws.
It explained, “Every consumer in America should be concerned about the intent behind this joint venture and its impact on fair market competition. This joint venture spotlights a concerning trend where an alliance with significant market share, reportedly controlling 60-85% of all sports content, could dictate market terms in a manner that may not serve the broader interests of consumers.”
Fubo is represented by Joseph Hall of Kellogg, Hansen, Todd, Figel & Frederick. The firm has represented clients across telecommunications in dealings with the Federal Communications Commission, including AT&T and Verizon.
Fox, and WBD did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Disney and ESPN declined to comment
Elijah Abrams
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2020
- Messages
- 610
Disney really should sell off/spin off 20th Century Studios and that unit's library if the company already has a lot of licensing power compared to the competition. They really shouldn't have all that power.https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/b...tent-licensing-renaissance-ampere-1235829555/
Why Disney Is Seen as the “Big Winner in the Licensing Renaissance”
"Disney trumps all the other major studios with its ownership of powerful licensable content, owning more than double that of its rivals," says Ampere Analysis in a new report.
by Georg Szalai - Global Business Editor
February 19, 2024 - 8:54am PST
Disney is “set to be the big winner in the licensing renaissance” as Hollywood giants look to make revenue from their content beyond using it on their own streaming services, according to a new study.
“Disney trumps all the other major studios with its ownership of powerful licensable content, owning more than double that of its rivals,” research firm Ampere Analysis explained in a report published Monday. “After four years of major studios employing a walled-garden approach to the distribution of their TV content on streaming, licensing is steadily making a comeback.”
It added: “Studios were understandably reluctant to give up exclusivity for major franchises as they built their streaming services. But Warner Bros. Discovery‘s 2023 deals to license recently released DC-adapted content to Amazon, Netflix and Tubi demonstrate that even strategies around exclusivity for core IP are now changing.”
Ampere’s analysis found that the number of TV seasons cross-licensed between Netflix and Warner Bros. Discovery’s Max and Discovery+ more than tripled in 2023, while Amazon’s overlap with studios’ streamers also grew “significantly.” The firm also noted “recent major deals” involving the likes of NBCUniversal and Disney.
Ampere formulated a “licensing power ranking” and analyzed Hollywood conglomerates’ content catalogs “to identify the number of titles currently held back that meet these criteria.”
The company identified titles with “licensing power,” which fulfill the following criteria: “they have completed their first run, have at least three seasons, are scripted, of U.S.-origin, and still maintain consumer engagement measured with Ampere’s Popularity Score,” a metric that reflects the online engagement for each title every month.
Disney holds the most titles with licensing power, owning 148 that were still exclusive to its own streaming services as of December 2023, Ampere concluded, describing this as “a potential licensing cache more than double the size of any other major Hollywood studio.” Among these shows are the likes of Sons of Anarchy and Buffy the Vampire Slayer, the firm said.
Paramount Global has 72 titles with licensing power in the back pocket, including Hawaii Five-0 and Star Trek: The Next Generation, Warner Bros. Discovery has 54, including The Sopranos and The Wire, and NBCUniversal has 47, including The Office and Law & Order: Criminal Intent, according to the Ampere analysis.
The research firm also looked at the available programming in terms of genre. Across major studios’ titles with licensing power, “comedy is the most common genre, accounting for 25 percent,” it explained. “This is driven by U.S. audiences’ continued interest in a host of locally produced long-running sitcoms. Many of these ended their run long ago (including The Office, The Golden Girls and Seinfeld) but some are more recent hits (such as Brooklyn Nine-Nine).”
Ampere highlighted though that “not all identified titles with licensing power will necessarily be cross-licensed.” For example, six of the 20 most popular titles in Paramount Global’s vault are part of the Star Trek franchise.
That said, the success of Suits on Netflix has been widely noted in Hollywood and on Wall Street. “Several recent examples of titles that have seen a huge boost in popularity following transmission in a second window suggest that studios should seek licensing partners (like NBCUniversal’s Suits on Netflix) with the largest userbase and the smallest audience overlap,” Ampere wrote.
“We expect more licensing deals for high-profile titles to be struck in 2024 between major VOD providers,” said Rahul Patel, research manager at Ampere. “Studios’ strategies will need to carefully balance exclusivity and non-exclusivity to ensure their streaming offerings are distinct and compelling while also maximizing the value of their content as it moves to a second window. Licensing can expand the audience for existing assets, extend shelf life and at the more successful end of the scale, inspire franchise expansion. This was the case with NBCUniversal when it commissioned a Suits spinoff following its success on Netflix.”
wabbott
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2021
- Messages
- 6,458
Judging from how low is the stock price for PARA and WBD (two other studios with valuable libraries), I'm really unsure of how much value there is in the FOX asset today. I suspect it would command a price quite a bit less than the 71 billion that was paid for it.
For sure, DIS has made some good money off the studio since the purchase, but Wall Street likes to see solid plans for the future.
All just MOO.
Elijah Abrams
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2020
- Messages
- 610
What does that stand for, or have you just been turned into a cow and need to go home?
-
New Snow White and Evil Queen Spinning Disney Pin
-
Step into History at Best Western Stovall's Inn Near Disneyland
-
Whatever Happened to Stitch's Great Escape and Why Did Disney Close It?
-
Fun Facts About Hollywood Studios at Walt Disney World
-
Sneak Peek at Music Behind New 'Lilo & Stitch' Live Action
-
How to Watch Disney World Episodes of 90s Sitcoms
-
The Best Time to Ride Donkey Kong: Mine-Cart Madness at Epic Universe
Save Up to 30% on Rooms at Walt Disney World!
Save up to 30% on rooms at select Disney Resorts Collection hotels when you stay 5 consecutive nights or longer in late summer and early fall. Plus, enjoy other savings for shorter stays.This offer is valid for stays most nights from August 1 to October 11, 2025.
CLICK HERE
