← Back to context

Comment by embedding-shape

7 hours ago

> Combination Will Offer More Choice and Greater Value for Consumers, Create More Opportunities for the Creative Community and Generate Shareholder Value

No doubt about the last part, but how does merging two giants create "More Choice"? I know corporate double-speak is already out of control and I know they're writing whatever they can do avoid regulators who surely are looking into the acquisition, but surely these executives cannot believe acquisitions lead to more choice, right?

I guess you are in the US. For you, WB content was already available. But you see, they never bothered to make that content available for most of the rest of the world. Netflix, on the other hand, is available most anywhere. This is exactly what it says on the can - more choice and greater value for me.

  • What's written on the can reads "please don't sue us, we're not a monopoly, and we will not gouge users".

    On the other hand Netflix will make its subscribers fund everything without reducing their income, and will not give these subscribers at least half of that content, because, why not?

    • If approval of this resulted in Netflix being required to release their crap on DVD (eventually) it’s actually be a win for consumers.

      DVDs at least keep working.

      1 reply →

    • > What's written on the can reads "please don't sue us, we're not a monopoly, and we will not gouge users".

      No reawwy this time we double-dog super promise

  • > I guess you are in the US.

    I am not, and WB was available via local options here (Southern European country).

    For me who isn't a Netflix customer (the group which is larger than the group of people who have Netflix, obviously), the choice gets less.

    And obviously anti-trust regulation doesn't care about the amount of choices for Netflix customers specifically, it cares about amount of choices for consumers at large, which will decrease with this change.

  • I think it's unlikely to change because most likely the content was not available for legal reasons, not technical. That's why for example when they re-release some shows they have to switch out to completely different music – the rights were not cleared in the first place and it'd be a huge hassle to go back and negotiate with every rightholder

  • Netflix acquiring WB’s content will not necessarily lead to all of it being available for streaming to you in any given country. Content licensing is complicated, to put it mildly.

  • > more choice and greater value for me

    That will exactly follow Netflix's price hikes.

    As in "value for money", they silenced the latter part :D

  • But Netflix content breadth and quality varies a lot from country to country. There's not one Netflix.

  • Netflix buying WB doesn't mean that licensing immediately becomes available worldwide.

    Netflix can provide its own content everywhere around the globe because they are the sole owner of it. The distribution rights to WB properties outside of the US will belong to completely different legal entities (even if those entities have WB in them).

There should be never any talk about "Shareholder Value". Shareholders do not create content, they do not subscribe at scale. Once your customer is no longer the focus, it's downhill from there, and it's been downhill for a WHILE.

I killed my Netflix sub over a year ago and I never even think about it. It's all dull, empty-calorie background TV.

The sad part is how the iconic HBO brand, already beaten by WBD into a pulp, is just going to merge with this average-ness and fade. End of an era, indeed.

More choice as in more content available to choose from on Netflix?

  • I think it will.

    Now they don't have to go negotiate for every WB content item. As it stands, subscribers might or might not get WB things, same as all the other IP holders that are playing hard to get. Otherwise, they might have to contract some seasons of a show from one holder and some from another, and maybe not at all sometimes.

  • Maybe they mean more content will be produced, which I believe. But I'd also argue that we really don't need more content on Netflix, we need higher quality. Netflix is drowning in a sea of mediocrity to the point where I have almost given up on investing in a new show because almost all of them reek of lazy writing and good-enough-but-not-outstanding direction. There are exceptions, but they are damn hard to find.

  • More choice as in “more revenue streams from which to create shareholder value.”

> No doubt about the last part, but how does merging two giants create "More Choice"?

This is performative marketing for the regulators to allow the merger. No one (including the regulators) believes this, and it won't come to pass. ("More choice" won't, I mean, the merger will and a lot of regulators and politicians involved will end up with new cars, boats, and kids' college tuitions paid.)

Adding Warner Bros. catalog will naturally lead to more titles to choose from for Netflix users. The choice of streaming services will be slimmer though. It will be interesting to see how regulators see it.