Warner/Discovery

[mwynn]

Originally Posted by Jay H.

I'm not confused at all. People who have a lot more money than I have are giving a lot of their money to people who aren't me. It happens all the time.

Not only that yet if you are I did deals like this we would be fined, and probably arrested.

[Darkstream]

Originally Posted by mwynn

Not only that yet if you are I did deals like this we would be fined, and probably arrested.

I would suspect that this deal isn't going to be permanent and that eventually Warner-Discovery will become independent of AT&T.

At this point AT&T are trying to recover from their losses so bringing Discovery in to run things with only a 29% stake for now sounds good for both parties, but most likely the promise of Warner-Discovery breaking away once AT&T recover might be part of the arrangement.

[tyler95]

From what I have read yes AT&T did sell WarnerMedia to Discover which will turn into one new company. The way it works is AT&T shareholders will get a chance to have some shares of the new company, not AT&T itself. AT&T gets over $40 billion to pay off their massive debt.

[CyberpunkCentral]

Okay, I'm starting to understand this a lot better now after doing some research. No, some people could be dead wrong. Just because Discovery has mostly AT&T shareholders, doesn't mean the company itself owns it.

[Darkstream]

Originally Posted by tyler95

From what I have read yes AT&T did sell WarnerMedia to Discover which will turn into one new company. The way it works is AT&T shareholders will get a chance to have some shares of the new company, not AT&T itself. AT&T gets over $40 billion to pay off their massive debt.

Ahhh, Okay. That makes sense. I was confusing AT&T as a company with the AT&T shareholders.

Originally Posted by CyberpunkCentral

Okay, I'm starting to understand this a lot better now after doing some research. No, some people could be dead wrong. Just because Discovery has mostly AT&T shareholders, doesn't mean the company itself owns it.

Right. I just picked up on that, too.

So, based on that, Warner-Discovery will indeed be a separate entity from AT&T.

[CyberpunkCentral]

Originally Posted by Darkstream

Right. I just picked up on that, too.

So, based on that, Warner-Discovery will indeed be separate entity from AT&T.

I mean, I already knew. But so many people were saying that AT&T will still own WarnerMedia, that I started to question myself. So basically I got confued because of other people's confusion, lol!

But yes, as far as I can tell, WarnerMedia will be a Discovery company.

[Ernest Rister]

Something I learned from...of all people...Oliver Stone. Never believe the first 24 hours of a news story (he was talking about press reporting on breaking news, which is often rushed to meet deadlines). You get the broad strokes. The details will take a while. Anyone can read a scoreboard. The answers will come...calm down...breathe...wait.

[VictoryAtNight]

I was looking at the programs that Discovery channel produces and I have never watched any of those cooking, home improvement, nature, reality shows, etc. In fact, I have no idea what channels (numbers) those shows are playing on my cable box.

[CyberpunkCentral]

It's odd, I didn't know Discovery owned Animal Planet, Food Network, HGTV, TLC, and some others here and there. Because I did use to watch these channels all the time, until I was done with cable. Yeah, this is actually cool. I would love these channels on HBO Max or whatever they decide to rename it.

[ctujackbauer]

Originally Posted by CyberpunkCentral

It's odd, I didn't know Discovery owned Animal Planet, Food Network, HGTV, TLC, and some others here and there. Because I did use to watch these channels all the time, until I was done with cable. Yeah, this is actually cool. I would love these channels on HBO Max or whatever they decide to rename it.

But would you like the Discovery channels added to the cost of HBO Max? $5 monthly with ads, $7 monthly without ads. Not only that, their ad supported version was what they're trying to push the most - it was supposedly a new shift to online subscription ads (more targeting, more ads in general.)

I know people like to s*** on AT&T but having deep pockets isn't always a bad thing. There was a time not long ago that AT&T was innovative even in the mobile carrier business: they were the exclusive partner to the Apple iPhone for its first five years, nobody was doing anything like that at the time.

[CyberpunkCentral]

Originally Posted by ctujackbauer

But would you like the Discovery channels added to the cost of HBO Max? $5 monthly with ads, $7 monthly without ads. Not only that, their ad supported version was what they're trying to push the most - it was supposedly a new shift to online subscription ads (more targeting, more ads in general.)

I know people like to s*** on AT&T but having deep pockets isn't always a bad thing. There was a time not long ago that AT&T was innovative even in the mobile carrier business: they were the exclusive partner to the Apple iPhone for its first five years, nobody was doing anything like that at the time.

I don't know. All I know is $20 a month is my limit for paying for a streaming service. Especially without ads. Discovery combined with WarnerMedia, maybe $30 or more. MAYBE. There are so many factors to consider I can't name them all here.

[kemcha]

Originally Posted by CyberpunkCentral

They did. I don't know why some are saying they did not. I could be wrong, but I was directly told by someone who studied law that AT&T did sold WarnerMedia.

That's what I thought as well. Mainstream media is saying that AT&T sold off the WarnerMedia assets to Discovery but others are saying that AT&T didn't sell it off, that they were only merging the content with Discovery's streaming service while others are making other wild theories.

What's also strange is some sites are reporting that AT&T paid $108b for WarnerMedia while others are reporting they paid $81b for it. There's just too many sites reporting conflicting news on WarnerMedia.

One of the stories being reported was that AT&T already had massive debt due to DirectTV and that the debt that WarnerMedia had compounded AT&T's problem. Some are even talking that DC Comics might not be safe. I'm also curious how this will affect J.J. Abrams planned "Black Superman" movie. It could be that Discovery might not be on board with that. That they may not be willing to rock the boat with the fans who would go to see a Superman movie.

Personally, I'm hoping that someone at Discovery will realize that they need to regain the trust of the fans of these franchises before they start rocking the boat. It's fine if they want to make a black superman but not a Clark Kent vision. I just think that Discovery may be re-evaluating WarnerMedia assets and using only what has worked in the past. Since ZSJL was successful, it could also mean a JL2 and JL3 not to mention that long awaited Green Lantern Corps movie. But, I do believe there will be a massive shakeup where it concerns the DCEU and DC Comics. These mergers and acquisitions always end up with restructuring and layoffs. Doesn't bode too well for Ray Fisher either in that they may not be wanting to "inherit" that particular social media "headache".

[CyberpunkCentral]

Originally Posted by kemcha

That's what I thought as well. Mainstream media is saying that AT&T sold off the WarnerMedia assets to Discovery but others are saying that AT&T didn't sell it off, that they were only merging the content with Discovery's streaming service while others are making other wild theories.

People who are saying that AT&T still owns WarnerMedia are dead wrong. They are confusing AT&T shareholders with AT&T the company. There is a big difference between the two.

[danman227460]

My biggest worry is how much investment Discovery wants to do.

Obviously with such a big slate of properties now, they should be going all in. But would such a small company(?) be willing to spend beyond its means?

If this was bought by another major studio, I wouldn't be as worried.

Discovery is probably the last media group I would have ever envisioned owning a major studio.

Originally Posted by kemcha

That's what I thought as well. Mainstream media is saying that AT&T sold off the WarnerMedia assets to Discovery but others are saying that AT&T didn't sell it off, that they were only merging the content with Discovery's streaming service while others are making other wild theories.

What's also strange is some sites are reporting that AT&T paid $108b for WarnerMedia while others are reporting they paid $81b for it. There's just too many sites reporting conflicting news on WarnerMedia.

One of the stories being reported was that AT&T already had massive debt due to DirectTV and that the debt that WarnerMedia had compounded AT&T's problem. Some are even talking that DC Comics might not be safe. I'm also curious how this will affect J.J. Abrams planned "Black Superman" movie. It could be that Discovery might not be on board with that. That they may not be willing to rock the boat with the fans who would go to see a Superman movie.

Personally, I'm hoping that someone at Discovery will realize that they need to regain the trust of the fans of these franchises before they start rocking the boat. It's fine if they want to make a black superman but not a Clark Kent vision. I just think that Discovery may be re-evaluating WarnerMedia assets and using only what has worked in the past. Since ZSJL was successful, it could also mean a JL2 and JL3 not to mention that long awaited Green Lantern Corps movie. But, I do believe there will be a massive shakeup where it concerns the DCEU and DC Comics. These mergers and acquisitions always end up with restructuring and layoffs. Doesn't bode too well for Ray Fisher either in that they may not be wanting to "inherit" that particular social media "headache".

[CyberpunkCentral]

Originally Posted by danman227460

My biggest worry is how much investment Discovery wants to do.

Obviously with such a big slate of properties now, they should be going all in. But would such a small company(?) be willing to spend beyond its means?

If this was bought by another major studio, I wouldn't be as worried.

Discovery is probably the last media group I would have ever envisioned owning a major studio.

I read somewhere Discovery will actually be putting more in than AT&T, believe it or not. Also I wouldn't worry about a "smaller" company owning a major studio. No major studio is independent anyway. Hell, WB was once bought by a shoe company before. Besides, at least Discovery is an entertainment company unlike AT&T, so they have a better eye on talent.

[danman227460]

I just feel there isn't much synergy between the two brands. While Discovery is an entertainment company, they aren't in the same wheelhouse as Disney, Universal et al.

So it would be interesting to see how Discovery tackles material they have never done before.

I hope to be surprised though as AT&T running WB was bound to end badly. But at least they gave use the Synder Cut.

Originally Posted by CyberpunkCentral

I read somewhere Discovery will actually be putting more in than AT&T, believe it or not. Also I wouldn't worry about a "smaller" company owning a major studio. No major studio is independent anyway. Hell, WB was once bought by a shoe company before. Besides, at least Discovery is an entertainment company unlike AT&T, so they have a better eye on talent.

[CyberpunkCentral]

Originally Posted by danman227460

I just feel there isn't much synergy between the two brands. While Discovery is an entertainment company, they aren't in the same wheelhouse as Disney, Universal et al.

It's extremely tricky for Disney and Comcast (who owns Universal) to buy WarnerMedia. The government doesn't allow that kinda monopoly. For example: Disney has ABC, Comcast has NBC, WarnerMedia has CNN. It's illegal to buy off another broadcasting company like that. That's why Disney couldn't take Fox News and Fox Sports with them. There are other examples as well, but you get the point.

[mwynn]

Originally Posted by CyberpunkCentral

It's extremely tricky for Disney and Comcast (who owns Universal) to buy WarnerMedia. The government doesn't allow that kinda monopoly. For example: Disney has ABC, Comcast has NBC, WarnerMedia has CNN. It's illegal to buy off another broadcasting company like that. There are other examples as well, but you get the point.

Illegal and legal is a matter of how much $ is involved.

AT&T tried with NBCUniversal and they probably lowballed them.

[oneway23]

I would not be surprised if NBCUni bought out AT&T's 71% share in the new company within five years. DC Comics would do well at Universal Studios theme parks.

[filmbuffTX]

Ad-Supported HBO Max to Launch at $9.99 Per Month


https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/bu...m_term=9346463