If that's the case, couldn't they wait until Warner spins its own things off, then buy WB/HBO?
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
Paramount Skydance wants WBD
- Thread starter michael hagerty
- Start date
Cheaper to buy it in bulk.
Why do people keep saying Paramount wants to dump CBS, when they just dumped a bunch of money to get UFC rights? Not to mention, the NFL has stated they want to continue the relationship with OTA tv into 2030s - and the NFL has a stake in paramount
It's mostly a Paramount+ streaming deal with "select numbered events set to simulcast on CBS"---so ALL the fights on streaming and only some on broadcast.
Paramount acquires UFC rights in 7-year, $7.7 billion deal with TKO Group
Paramount will become the new home to all UFC events in the U.S., while UFC's CEO says the White House may host a July 4 event broadcast on CBS.
www.cbsnews.com
If they sell CBS, a new owner would be legally obligated to fulfill that part of the contract.
A less than 10% stake, the importance of which, in terms of carriage, the league itself downplays:
NFL Head Says Equity Stake in Paramount and ESPN Won't Affect Distribution Deals
The NFL doesn't' believe that its equity stake in Paramount or its upcoming stake in EPSN will impact its distribution or editorial decisions.
www.thewrap.com
What @Don CT said, plus maybe they want to be the ones to decide what stays and what goes. Attempting to influence that with a deal on the table could be a conflict of interest and/or a collusion issue.
Better to buy the whole, make your own assessment of what to keep and what to dump and use the proceeds of the sale of those assets to offset the cost of the acquisition.
Is this thing going to end up a "Cumulus on steroids" Where is Skydance getting it's money? Sooner or later you have to show some kind of return on investment. I guess they can go in debt but the note or bondholders would much rather you pay your debts than risk "taking a haircut" and end up with equity in a media company that can't pay it's debts.
Looking at this from a shareholder: last year according to SA they had a -$9.34 earnings per share. To be fair the M&A costs where ridiculous but the last quarter (June 25) was still a negative 2 cents per share. According to Trading Vew their free cash flow the last quarter was only $114 million dollars. These figures where most likely a "consolidated" statement. A fairer look will be next summer.
There is a tendency to "buy earnings". Any one remember WorldCom? But then there is Berkshire Hathaway who does it well most of the time*. BH usually buys companies that have "strong management and ownership (a surpriseing number were family ran)" and they stay in place. Not fixer uppers.
*Then there is Mondelez. I don't know what Warren was thinking.
IMHO media stocks are not for the faint of heart. Content creation is super important. Kinda like playing Black Jack in a casino. You just hope there are more winners than losers.
Looking at this from a shareholder: last year according to SA they had a -$9.34 earnings per share. To be fair the M&A costs where ridiculous but the last quarter (June 25) was still a negative 2 cents per share. According to Trading Vew their free cash flow the last quarter was only $114 million dollars. These figures where most likely a "consolidated" statement. A fairer look will be next summer.
There is a tendency to "buy earnings". Any one remember WorldCom? But then there is Berkshire Hathaway who does it well most of the time*. BH usually buys companies that have "strong management and ownership (a surpriseing number were family ran)" and they stay in place. Not fixer uppers.
*Then there is Mondelez. I don't know what Warren was thinking.
IMHO media stocks are not for the faint of heart. Content creation is super important. Kinda like playing Black Jack in a casino. You just hope there are more winners than losers.
Ellison has unlimited funds to do what ever he wants.
Well, not unlimited, but he has what the kids call a metric f***ton of money.
And a rich dad who's totally behind what he wants to do in media:
Let’s just say, they won’t be asking for a loan.
Exactly. They paid $8 billion for Paramount. That article I linked to tells how Dad made $100 billion in a day.
Warner Bros. Discovery is Larry's lunch money. All they need is regulatory approval, and in the current administration, I like their odds.
Would they allow them to own both WB and Paramount studios.
Ellison has "Soros money." He can do what Soros did with Audacy. For Audacy, it was enough money so the company could go private.
He doesn't have a Hundred Billion in the bank. It's all "paper profit". Oracle not going away but the only way you get the (profit) is to sell the stock, then pay taxes. If Oracle stock goes down so does his net worth. I'm not saying they could be destitute even really rich folks can have cash issues.
I was only looking at this as a shareholder of WBD. If am given the choice of cash or stock, I take cash. As my late grant Aunt said " You got to have kasssh". I plan on getting a piece of the "lunch money".
He doesn't have a Hundred Billion in the bank. It's all "paper profit". Oracle not going away but the only way you get the (profit) is to sell the stock, then pay taxes. If Oracle stock goes down so does his net worth. I'm not saying they could be destitute even really rich folks can have cash issues.
I was only looking at this as a shareholder of WBD. If am given the choice of cash or stock, I take cash. As my late grant Aunt said " You got to have kasssh". I plan on getting a piece of the "lunch money.
There'd still be four majors---a combined Paramount/WB, Universal, Disney and Sony.
Consolidation orthodoxy says you can (and should) get to three major players in any industry without anti-trust concerns.
I think in a Democratic administration, there'd be some pushback from DOJ. In this one, highly doubtful.
Would they run them as separate studios or a combined like Disney did with Fox. Did Sony buy out Colombia Pictures.
That'd be up to them. Sony has owned Columbia for more than 30 years.
He doesn't have a Hundred Billion in the bank. It's all "paper profit". Oracle not going away but the only way you get the (profit) is to sell the stock, then pay taxes. If Oracle stock goes down so does his net worth. I'm not saying they could be destitute even really rich folks can have cash issues.
I was only looking at this as a shareholder of WBD. If am given the choice of cash or stock, I take cash. As my late grant Aunt said " You got to have kasssh". I plan on getting a piece of the "lunch money.
Double post thanks to bad wifi
WBD stock is up about 50% this week, to almost $20 a share. Unfortunately the cost basis is $30.