Netflix’s $72B WB acquisition confounds the future of movie theaters, streaming

Netflix's proposed entertainment juggernaut set to face regulatory scrutiny.

See full article...

 

[andygates]

Great. Now our streaming service fees will rise to the absurd level of theatre pricing.

Yo ho, me hearties, yo ho.

 

[andygates]

I really and honestly struggle with my feelings about this stuff.

I believe in paying and supporting content creators. I'm really grateful for all the subscribers we have, you make a difference in our existence. We are not Too Big Too Fail, that's for sure.

What we do depends on the support of our readers. It doesn't exist otherwise.

And yet when I see people posting etc I not only get where they're coming from, but I also wonder at what point is it almost an ethical response?

3 companies owning every major piece of media is bad. Encouraging the failure of that model almost feels like it might be the best course at this point, since it's clear nobody with any power is going to be on our side.

When they cancel Jimmy Kimmel for speaking some really basic truth to power and the only response available is "cancel Disney+" that's incredibly unhealthy, we shouldn't even be in that position in the first place.

Specifically on this one, I ain't giving a penny to JKR. If flix sprouts hog warts, I'm walking. And that's part of the whole "too big too fail" thing. Nope.

 

[andygates]

Which seems functionally equivalent to purchase of digital content on most media. Compared to a DVD which is functional only while I can still access a DVD player, etc. I mean Apple could go under, or stop offering a media player. Certainly films they no longer have rights to sell remain in my library and remain playable (whether I’ve downloaded them or not).

No. DVD is an open standard, you can get machines anywhere. Apple is a rent. Miss the rent, lose the stuff. You lose the right to stop supporting Tim Apple if his shenanigans offend you, because you'd lose "your" stuff. That's too much of a switching cost.

 

[andygates]

As a biz-clueless brit, can someone ELI5 why Warner's is for sale at all?

 

[andygates]

Warner Bros has been a distressed asset for nearly 30 years ever since they were acquired by AOL back in the 90's in what is widely regarded as one of the worst, most misguided deals of the 20th century.

They have a ton of debt and have been bought and sold multiple times since then. The current owners only bought them in the hopes of flipping them a few years later. This is the culmination of that.

Thanks for the background... so why would Netflix's board go for this obviously cursed business? Asset stripping, special sauce, weird financial instrument, what's their angle?

 

[andygates]

I don't get all the hand-wringing over movie theaters coming under threat, like that hasn't been a 20-year story.

Specifically at this time it could be an evil venture capital dick move. "Distressed assets" on a balance sheet can be utterly fine IRL until they get Red Roostered.

(This month's extra cynicism comes after reading Technofeudalism - What Killed Capitalism and it's these giant predatory borgs)

 

[andygates]

If there really is a market for movie theaters, some other enterprise will fill that niche; it just won't be subsidized by forcing everybody else into theaters like it has been up till now.

If people really love the theater experience, like Hollywood so frantically, desperately claims, they will keep going and there will be no problem. If people don't love the theater experience, they won't, and public theaters will close down or become a tiny boutique market, because people don't want them. So what? Why should people be forced to buy something they don't want?

Red Lobster, not Red Rooster, what was I thinking of? Bunch of perfectly popular and profitable restaurants that got leveraged by venture capital to make line go up then abandoned with dire debts. That sort of thing can happen to movie houses too.

Unrelated, was Civil War any good?