Quark's

1071 readers

1 users here now

Come to Quark’s, Quark’s is Fun!

General off-topic chat for the crew of startrek.website. Trek-adjacent discussions, other sci-fi television, navigating the Fediverse, server meta (within reason), selling expired cases of Yamok sauce, it’s all fair game.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

‘Warnamount’ Merger Talk Confounds Investors And Industry: “Why Would Any Company Try To Catch A Falling Knife?” (deadline.com)

submitted 8 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

9 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 10 points 8 months ago (6 children)

While the business has reckoned with more seismic deals in recent years, among them Disney-Fox and AT&T-Time Warner, this time the reality seems to be dawning that bigger is not always better. Streaming platforms swim in red ink and legacy media assets (mainly linear TV) are eroding. Yes, Zaslav has hinted at opportunities to be had, but WBD was not really considered a buyer given its oft-stated focus on reducing its enormous debt. It’s not clear how trying to swallow a company with hefty debt of its own solves any problems.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago (5 children)

Before I say anything, I am against the merger. However as far as streaming goes, having a monopoly on content makes a streaming platform inherently better. WBD isn't betting on being the most successful streaming platform, it's betting on every other streaming platform that can't compete with Zaslav buying everything.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago (4 children)

The best tv and movie streaming platform in history, Netflix circa mid-2010s, had no monopoly on content whatsoever. All these studios trying to monopolize their content onto their own streaming services has only made streaming worse.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

the only streamers were Netflix and Hulu? When anything you wanted to stream was on one or the other? Otherwise known as a duopoly. It's like how the PC gaming marketplace was objectively at it's best when Steam had a monopoly on selling games. Having everything in one place is better.

Streaming will get better, everything else will get worse as the monopolies get to full power again.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago

Netflix had a near monopoly on the streaming but not on the actual shows and movies. All the studios still owned their shows and movies and could unilaterally pull them off Netflix and make their own services, evidenced by the fact that that's exactly what they did. Importantly, the monopoly was not vertically integrated. Similarly, Valve makes very few of the games available on Steam.

Streaming will not get better as the studios fully monopolize it. Not without at the very least and most liberal an enforced ban on vertical integration in visual media and on exclusive licensing agreements. That won't happen under capitalism though, so the only real improvement will be in the resurgence of piracy.

load more comments (2 replies)