Netflix has reached a deal to buy Warner Bros Discovery's TV, film studios and streaming division for $72 billionNetflix has reached a deal to buy Warner Bros Discovery's TV, film studios and streaming division for $72 billion

How Netflix won Hollywood’s biggest prize, Warner Bros Discovery

2025/12/06 09:33

LOS ANGELES/NEW YORK, USA – What started as a fact-finding mission for Netflix culminated in one of the biggest media deals in the last decade and one that stands to reshape the global entertainment business landscape, people with direct knowledge of the deal told Reuters.

Netflix announced on Friday it had reached a deal to buy Warner Bros Discovery’s TV, film studios and streaming division for $72 billion.

Although Netflix had publicly downplayed speculation about buying a major Hollywood studio as recently as October, the streaming pioneer threw its hat in the ring when Warner Bros Discovery kicked off an auction on October 21, after rejecting a trio of unsolicited offers from Paramount Skydance.

Details of Netflix’s plan and the Warner Bros board’s deliberations, based on interviews with seven advisers and executives, are reported here for the first time.

Initially motivated by curiosity about its business, Netflix executives quickly recognized the opportunity presented by Warner Bros, beyond the ability to offer the century-old studio’s deep catalog of movies and television shows to Netflix subscribers. Library titles are valuable to streaming services as these movies and shows can account for 80% of viewing, according to one person familiar with the business.

Warner Bros’ business units – particularly its theatrical distribution and promotion unit and its studio – were complementary to Netflix. The HBO Max streaming service also would benefit from insights learned years ago by streaming leader Netflix that would accelerate HBO’s growth, according to one person familiar with the situation.

Netflix began flirting with the idea of acquiring the studio and streaming assets, another source familiar with the process told Reuters, after WBD announced plans in June to split into two publicly traded companies, separating its fading but cash-generating cable television networks from the legendary Warner Bros studios, HBO and the HBO Max streaming service.

Netflix and Warner Bros did not reply to requests for comment.

The work intensified this autumn, as Netflix began vying for the assets against Paramount and NBCUniversal’s parent company, Comcast.

‘Strategic flexibility’

Warner Bros kicked off the public auction in October, after Paramount submitted the first of three escalating offers for the media company in September. Sources familiar with the offer said Paramount aimed to pre-empt the planned separation because the split would undercut its ability to combine the traditional television networks businesses and increase the risk of being outbid for the studio by the likes of Netflix.

Around that time, banker JPMorgan Chase & Co was advising Warner Bros Discovery CEO David Zaslav to consider reversing the order of the planned spin, shedding the Discovery Global unit comprising the company’s cable television assets first. This would give the company more flexibility, including the option to sell the studio, streaming and content assets, which advisers believed would draw strong interest, according to sources familiar with the matter.

Executives for the streaming service and its advisory team, which included the investment banks Moelis & Company , Wells Fargo, and the law firm Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, had been holding daily morning calls for the past two months, sources said. The group worked throughout Thanksgiving week – including multiple calls on Thanksgiving Day – to prepare a bid by the December 1 deadline.

Warner Bros’ board similarly convened every day for the last eight days leading up to the decision on Thursday, when Netflix presented the final offer that sources described as the only offer they considered binding and complete, sources familiar with the deliberations said.

The board favored Netflix’s deal, which would yield more immediate benefits over one by Comcast. The NBCUniversal parent proposed merging its entertainment division with Warner Bros Discovery, creating a much larger unit that would rival Walt Disney But it would have taken years to execute, the sources said.

Comcast declined to comment.

Although Paramount raised its offer to $30 per share on Thursday for the entire company, for an equity value of $78 billion, according to sources familiar with the deal, the Warner Bros board had concerns about the financing, other sources said.

Paramount declined comment.

To reassure the seller over what is expected to be a significant regulatory review, Netflix put forward one of the largest breakup fees in M&A history of $5.8 billion, a sign of its belief it would win regulatory approval, the sources said. “No one lights $6 billion on fire without that conviction,” one of the sources said.

Until the moment late on Thursday night when Netflix learned its offer had been accepted – news that was greeted by clapping and cheering on a group call – one Netflix executive confided that they thought they had only a 50-50 chance. – Rappler.com

Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

Citadel pushes SEC to classify open-source developers as unregistered stockbrokers

Citadel pushes SEC to classify open-source developers as unregistered stockbrokers

The post Citadel pushes SEC to classify open-source developers as unregistered stockbrokers appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. On Dec. 2, Citadel Securities filed a 13-page letter with the SEC arguing that decentralized protocols facilitating tokenized US equity trading already meet statutory definitions of exchanges and broker-dealers, and regulators should treat them accordingly. Two days later, the SEC’s Investor Advisory Committee convened a panel on tokenized equities that made clear the question is no longer whether stocks can move on-chain, but whether they can do so without dismantling the permissionless architecture that built DeFi. The gap between those two positions now defines the most consequential regulatory fight in crypto since the Howey test debates. Citadel’s letter arrived at the moment when tokenized equities stopped being a thought experiment. The firm welcomes tokenization in principle but insists that realizing its benefits requires applying “the key bedrock principles and investor protections that underpin the fairness, efficiency, and resiliency of US equity markets.” In other words, the document suggests that companies seeking to trade tokenized Apple shares must comply with Nasdaq rules, including transparent fees, consolidated tape reporting, market surveillance, fair access, and registration as an exchange or broker-dealer. The filing warns that granting broad exemptive relief to DeFi platforms creates a shadow US equity market in which liquidity fragments, retail investors lose Exchange Act protections, and incumbents face regulatory arbitrage from unregistered competitors. Within hours, Uniswap founder Hayden Adams fired back on X, calling Citadel’s position an attempt to “treat software developers of decentralized protocols like centralized intermediaries.” He invoked ConstitutionDAO, the 2021 crowdfunding effort that pooled $47 million in Ethereum to bid on a first-edition Constitution at Sotheby’s, only to lose to Griffin’s $43.2 million bid. Additionally, Adams zeroed in on Citadel’s fair-access argument, calling it “actual nerve” from the dominant player in retail order flow. The exchange captured crypto’s core narrative of permissionless code versus gatekeeper control and…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/12/07 02:32
RWA Tokenization and Crypto Activities Declared High-Risk, Unapproved

RWA Tokenization and Crypto Activities Declared High-Risk, Unapproved

The post RWA Tokenization and Crypto Activities Declared High-Risk, Unapproved appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Key Takeaways: Seven major Chinese financial associations issued a coordinated warning against RWA tokenization and all virtual-currency-related activity. Regulators stressed that no RWA tokenization projects are authorized in China, citing risks of fraud, speculation, and illegal fundraising. Institutions and individuals were told to avoid all forms of crypto involvement, while enforcement measures widen to include foreign firms serving mainland users. China has delivered one of its strongest signals yet that crypto-linked products, especially RWA tokenization remain firmly off-limits. A rare joint notice issued by seven national financial associations warns that emerging narratives around “stablecoins,” “air coins,” mining, and tokenized real-world assets are now being used as fronts for fraudulent fundraising, cross-border fund transfers, and market manipulation. Below is a structured, journalist-style breakdown of the alert, written uniquely, with expanded insights to help readers understand the regulatory landscape and its implications for global crypto markets. Read More: China to Shake Crypto Markets With First-Ever Yuan Stablecoin Plan Amid U.S. Dollar Dominance China’s Joint Warning: RWA Tokenization Not Approved and Considered High-Risk China’s latest advisory makes it clear that the rapid rise of RWA tokenization in global markets does not translate into tolerance at home. The notice states that financial regulators have not approved any RWA token issuance, trading, or financing activities inside the mainland. Officials emphasized that tokenizing traditional assets such as bonds, real estate claims, or corporate receivables introduces several layers of risk. These include: Fake or unverifiable underlying assets Operational and governance failures Speculative hype marketed as financial innovation Use of RWA tokens for illegal fundraising or unapproved securities issuance The message is unambiguous: any assumption that RWAs occupy a regulatory grey zone in China is incorrect. They are grouped alongside virtual currencies, mining schemes, and stablecoins as activities that can trigger criminal liability when conducted domestically. Why RWAs…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/12/07 02:40