What have we done to get here right?
As confirmed by many outlets, including the companies themselves, Paramount Skydance is acquiring Warner Bros. Discovery for $110B. More than what Viacom bought CBS for in 2000, but significantly less than what AOL spent for TimeWarner for $344B in today's money. To some, this feels like a brand-new era for Paramount, which just completed its merger over half a year ago; to others, it feels like a nightmare waiting to start over, especially at the WB side.
For starters, it's two major film corporations that will still be separate, as David Ellison stated, with each studio releasing 15 films annually. (Mind you, they just pushed the animated Avatar: The Last Airbender film to Paramount+ after endorsing not having straight-to-streaming films)
The question is, which one of them will get the big blockbuster films? Of course, everyone will say Warner Bros. because of its legacy and international reach, but Paramount, as they stated, is still in a rebuilding phase of seeing what free money looks like. Aren't they supposed to focus on bringing back Paramount's glory into Academy Award discussions and get widely acclaimed filmmakers on board to produce for them?
Let's not forget the real estate. Analysts believe they will divest a studio lot. For sure, they have to keep both the Melrose and Burbank lots, right? Especially if you want to reach that goal for 30 films a year.
Another headscratcher that's unclear right now is the business and leadership consolidations. Paramount went from having multiple studios to having just Paramount TVS and CBS Studios. Now they will add in WBTV and its international studios. Will it all be under Paramount, WB, or Skydance?
Of course, it's easy to say that the TNT Sports brand should consolidate into the much bigger CBS Sports banner, and CBS News + CNN will probably be MSNBC, pardon my French, what MS Now used to be all over again, sharing resources but with different leadership. But what about the likes of Cartoon Network and Nickelodeon? CN is now just a label and an 11-hour timeslot for Adult Swim while both struggled to adapt to kids on YouTube. Comedy Central and TBS don't even look like what they used to be a decade and a half ago. And would George Cheeks stick around longer for the Discovery brands, too?
Now, for our bread and butter in terms of our news coverage, streaming. It's already been said that Paramount+ and HBO Max (and discovery+ and BET+) will be merged into one service. Online, there's a stir because people believe HBO Max has a better name and foundation than Paramount+. In all honesty, yes, this is true, as Paramount+ has been using the old CBS All Access tech (check the Paramount+ subreddit for the weekly complaints). But since the merger, David Ellison and team have been working to change the tech stack for its streaming services, and say it would launch around the summer time. Whenever this merger with HBO Max occurs, it will definitely be using the new P+ platform rather than reusing HBO Max's now 7-year-old platform.
And let's acknowledge that Warner Bros. Discovery went back and forth on the name HBO Max. The reason it was initially changed to Max was to "broaden their reach without damaging the HBO brand," which is what happened throughout 2022-24. Be honest: do you want people to see the HBO name alongside way over a dozen cheap Discovery reality shows? Also, parents were not paying for a service with HBO, which is seen as an adult brand, to let their kids watch cartoons or Sesame Street, which is why many of them were removed in the first place.
The reason for the change back to HBO Max was that the existing HBO audience still watched the HBO content and nothing else. They remained loyal to their favorite programs, while the general audience that wasn't watching Discovery shows or sports went elsewhere.
This is why HBO shouldn't be in the new service name if they choose not to continue with the Paramount+ name for some reason. If they want to diversify their audience like Netflix, they should not limit their service name to a brand specific to one genre or audience. That's why it makes sense for Paramount to continue using the Paramount+ name, or maybe revive the Showtime name, without hurting the audience currently watching.
One thing that is still confusing is that Pluto TV is also listed as part of a merged service, which doesn't make sense. Yes, Pluto is not where it used to be in terms of market share compared to Tubi and Roku Channel, but it was always neglected by the original founder, Tom Ryan, with respect to him. They began to focus on investing more in P+ while the competition took advantage. But again, it's a free ad-supported television, FAST, service. Like AVODs like Tubi, it serves a special role in providing content while making profits through advertising. It will use the same tech stack P+ will soon adopt, but consolidating the service entirely would turn it into Peacock 2.0, creating confusion and leaving people without the will to pay. Integration, akin to Hulu on Disney+, is fine, but a complete merger is messy.
There are so many more questions to ask about this merger, but only time will tell. It's still pending regulatory approval, and a shareholder vote will happen later before this whole thing closes. And even then, we will eventually have to change domains to supplement a new service name. Pray and klere limye a for those employees, there will be thousands of pink slips for the next decade. All hail King Ellison...