Future of Paramount+ among merger talks

[Danja]

Is there any reason that Steven Paul and Skydance can’t put their bids together and match the Sony/Apollo bid?

Greed.

if Skydance combines with Steven Paul and his group, Mr. Paul is going to want to be compensated.

Nothing comes for free.

Then there's the question of what Mr. Paul brings to the table (Sony can run a film studio. They've owned Columbia Pictures since 1989.)

 

[FederationHistorian]

Greed.

if Skydance combines with Steven Paul and his group, Mr. Paul is going to want to be compensated.

Nothing comes for free.

Then there's the question of what Mr. Paul brings to the table (Sony can run a film studio. They've owned Columbia Pictures since 1989.)

I don’t think anyone is disputing that Sony can run a company.

I think the issue is that its perceived that Apollo, as a private equity firm, will strip Paramount down to a husk. Otherwise, a deal would have been made by now.

If Paramount being stripped for parts is not an issue, then they may as well have sold BET to Bryon Allen long ago.

 

[James Cole]

CBS and Viacom really shouldn't have split in the mid-2000s. Who would have thought cable channels would decline far more quickly than broadcast network?

Eventually the CBS network and the local TV stations should be sold off. Apollo would be the type of firm to take over a mature asset like that and manage it's decline a la local radio and newspapers.

 

[Danja]

Eventually the CBS network and the local TV stations should be sold off. Apollo would be the type of firm to take over a mature asset like that and manage it's decline a la local radio and newspapers.

Apollo owns Cox Broadcasting.

If Apollo were to acquire CBS, it would be bumping up against its federally mandated cap on station ownership (by law, one company is not permitted to own more than 39% of the broadcast stations within the U.S. market).

 

[Firebird]

They seem to be as bad at selling their company as they were running it….

You've almost got to admire the consistency.

CBS and Viacom really shouldn't have split in the mid-2000s.

It would've been illegal for them to stay together as a corporate entity back then due to FCC guidelines.

 

[James Cole]

If Apollo were to acquire CBS, it would be bumping up against its federally mandated cap on station ownership (by law, one company is not permitted to own more than 39% of the broadcast stations within the U.S. market).

True, but with the UHF discount that counts those stations as only having half of the actual reach they'd likely only need to spin off a few stations to stay under the cap. Looking at the list of stations, the major conflicts would be Boston (CBS and a Fox station) and Pittsburgh (CBS and an NBC), and perhaps Seattle since KSTW is VHF.

It would've been illegal for them to stay together as a corporate entity back then due to FCC guidelines.

Viacom was spun off in the early 1970's from CBS because of fin/syn rules, but those were all repealed during the 1990's. The Redstones split CBS and Viacom in 2005 because CBS was slow growth while the cable channels were higher growth, not because of any government regulation. Granted the Janet Jackson incident did play a small part, which did delay CBS selling off some TV stations in Austin and Salt Lake City (a bad idea in hindsight as both are some of the fastest growing areas in the US -- they really did never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity).

 

[Noname Given]

Is there any reason that Steven Paul and Skydance can’t put their bids together and match the Sony/Apollo bid?

Each group is trying to obtain Paramount for a reason, and Sky Dance and Paul's ideas as to where to take the studio after an acquisition may not be compatible with each other.

 

[James Cole]

New rumor suggests Warner Bros could be part of the Sony / Apollo deal... they might want the CBS broadcast network?

 

[Danja]

New rumor suggests Warner Bros could be part of the Sony / Apollo deal... they might want the CBS broadcast network?

Warner is $55 billion in debt from its own merger with Discovery Networks.

They don't have any business making further acquisitions.

 

[Doctorossi]

They don't have any business making further acquisitions.

Yeah, but when's that ever stopped an American corporation?

 

[Danja]

Yeah, but when's that ever stopped an American corporation?

The last thing they need is more debt.

The next step after that is Bankruptcy Court. >.<

 

[Danja]

The merger is off:

https://deadline.com/2024/06/shari-redstones-paramount-breaks-off-talks-with-skydance-1235970595/

Shari Redstone, Paramount End Merger Talks With Skydance As Two Sides Unable “To Reach Mutually Acceptable Terms”

After months of negotiations, Paramount‘s controlling shareholder Shari Redstone has broken off merger talks with David Ellison‘s Skydance.

National Amusements has “not been able to reach mutually acceptable terms regarding the potential transaction with Skydance Media for the acquisition of a controlling stake in NAI,” said the Redstone family trust that controls Paramount.

 

[Tuskin38]

I want off this crazy ride

 

[tomalak301]

I'm a little confused about something. They are putting money into these new Trek shows with big cast gets (Holly Hunter and Paul Giamatti) and big news regarding when Section 31 is set. On the other hand the financial situation at Paramount is in such turmoil and this news is just a rollar coaster of craziness, I wonder if the two are related. You have good news on the Trek front but bad news on the platform that streams Trek. Are these shows set to go and air (Meaning are they locked in financially) or could the sales impact the shows? Personally, I think Star Trek should be streamed on either Netflix or Apple TV+ but I feel like the two stories should be interconnected.

 

[Nerys Myk]

I'm a little confused about something. They are putting money into these new Trek shows with big cast gets (Holly Hunter and Paul Giamatti) and big news regarding when Section 31 is set. On the other hand the financial situation at Paramount is in such turmoil and this news is just a rollar coaster of craziness, I wonder if the two are related. You have good news on the Trek front but bad news on the platform that streams Trek. Are these shows set to go and air (Meaning are they locked in financially) or could the sales impact the shows? Personally, I think Star Trek should be streamed on either Netflix or Apple TV+ but I feel like the two stories should be interconnected.

They still have a business to run and products to make/sell.

 

[tomalak301]

They still have a business to run and products to make/sell.

But if that business gets sold or goes bankrupt, that throws everything that was part of said business into chaos.

 

[Nerys Myk]

But if that business gets sold or goes bankrupt, that throws everything that was part of said business into chaos.

Maybe.

 

[fireproof78]

But if that business gets sold or goes bankrupt, that throws everything that was part of said business into chaos.

They can't sit around and wait.

 

[UssGlenn]

if Paramount were to get liquidated I suspect the individual tentpole IP would be sold off. the question is who buys Star Trek. Secret Hideout or Roddenberry Entertainment would be interested, but not have the capital needed. It fits Apple's brand. But Bezos is a Trekkie.

 

[trekfan_1]

Considering Amazon and Paramount have had some business ventures together I'm surprised they havnt entered the arena. Or atleast I've heard 0 rumblings that they are even in the mix