Comcast to potentially buy part of Warner/Discovery in future | Page 5 | Inside Universal Forums
Toggle sidebar

Comcast to potentially buy part of Warner/Discovery in future

  • Signing up for a Premium Membership is a donation to help Inside Universal maintain costs and offers an ad-free experience on the forum. Learn more about it here.
Trying to find a better look at what could be open if Universal gets it, and this is what I have. (Can absolutely be off on things)

  • DC Comics (Rights would need to be terminated from SFCorp)
  • Looney Tunes (Rights would need to be terminated from SFCorp)
  • Wizarding World (Still would need to be in consultation with JKR)
  • Peter Jackson's Middle Earth, including The Hobbit & LOTR (Would need to broker a deal with Embracer on rights)
  • Beetlejuice
  • The 1939 rendition of Wizard of Oz
  • Scooby-Doo
  • Tom & Jerry
  • Hanna Barbara in general
  • New Line's collective of Film IP (which would include a large amount of horror IP that while would need to be settled with family estates, could give HHN a boon that would rival 20CP's catelogue)
  • Cartoon Network's IP's, which include a vast amount of IP's ranging from Steven Universe, Adventure Time, Powerpuff Girls, Dexter's Lab and a lot more
  • Adult Swim's IP's and back-catelogue
  • Control over WBJapan and various major JP animated IP's developed within the group.
  • RWBY
  • The Matrix
  • Mad Max
  • Wonka
Any others I'm missing?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Nico
What will really suck if this happens is that so many people are going to lose their jobs AGAIN at WB. They just went through a bunch of cuts due to overlap with Discovery, now we'd be looking at them having to cut people for overlap between WB and NBCUniversal. Entire animation studios would likely be closed, much like in the Disney Fox deal. Warner Brothers Animation would serve Universal no purpose and Hannah Barbara would likely be absorbed into Illumination along with Looney Toons.

Then there's the issue about CNN. Comcast obviously would not be allowed to own it due to owning MSNBC, so that would either be left out of the deal or it would be sold to Universal and the government would tell them that Comcast has to find a buyer within a certain amount of time, much like when Disney was told they had to find a buyer for the regional sports networks.

To continue... if Zazzy's whole endgame here is to flip as is the insinuation (which i'll believe when we actually hear more chatter around it), why the hell would they be creating a new streaming service that combines HBO Max with Discovery? I get it will save the company a lot of money in operating costs, but you would think if the plan is to sell (but hang on to Discovery), then HBO Max would be an enticing piece on it's own. It would allow NBCUniversal to shutter Peacock and to transfer all of their content to HBO Max, which has wayyyy more subscribers and is culturally way more relevant.

This whole thing is just perplexing and honestly, while it would be smart of Universal (or Apple if they chose to get in on this), it just feels slimy that Zaslav basically bought WB in the dead of night out of nowhere from AT&T just to use it as a fixer upper project to then sell for hopefully more money than he bought it for only a few years later.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UniversalRBLX, AlexanderMBush and Coolbfitz
AlexanderMBush said:
Trying to find a better look at what could be open if Universal gets it, and this is what I have. (Can absolutely be off on things)

  • DC Comics (Rights would need to be terminated from SFCorp)
  • Looney Tunes (Rights would need to be terminated from SFCorp)
  • Wizarding World (Still would need to be in consultation with JKR)
  • Peter Jackson's Middle Earth, including The Hobbit & LOTR (Would need to broker a deal with Embracer on rights)
  • Beetlejuice
  • The 1939 rendition of Wizard of Oz
  • Scooby-Doo
  • Hanna Barbara in general
  • New Line's collective of Film IP (which would include a large amount of horror IP that while would need to be settled with family estates, could give HHN a boon that would rival 20CP's catelogue)
  • Cartoon Network's IP's, which include a vast amount of IP's ranging from Steven Universe, Adventure Time, Powerpuff Girls, Dexter's Lab and a lot more
  • Adult Swim's IP's and back-catelogue
  • Control over WBJapan and various major JP animated IP's developed within the group.
Any others I'm missing?
Click to expand...
The Matrix
Blade Runner
The "Vacation" series. Particularly for park use Wally World and Christmas Vacation.
Mad Max.
Willy Wonka
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles
Tom & Jerry.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pumpkinbot343 and AlexanderMBush
Nick said:
What will really suck if this happens is that so many people are going to lose their jobs AGAIN at WB. They just went through a bunch of cuts due to overlap with Discovery, now we'd be looking at them having to cut people for overlap between WB and NBCUniversal. Entire animation studios would likely be closed, much like in the Disney Fox deal. Warner Brothers Animation would serve Universal no purpose and Hannah Barbara would likely be absorbed into Illumination along with Looney Toons.

Then there's the issue about CNN. Comcast obviously would not be allowed to own it due to owning MSNBC, so that would either be left out of the deal or it would be sold to Universal and the government would tell them that Comcast has to find a buyer within a certain amount of time, much like when Disney was told they had to find a buyer for the regional sports networks.

To continue... if Zazzy's whole endgame here is to flip as is the insinuation (which i'll believe when we actually hear more chatter around it), why the hell would they be creating a new streaming service that combines HBO Max with Discovery? I get it will save the company a lot of money in operating costs, but you would think if the plan is to sell, but to hang on to Discovery, then HBO Max would be an enticing piece on it's own. It would allow NBCUniversal to shutter Peacock and to transfer all of their content to HBO Max, which has wayyyy more subscribers and is culturally way more relevant.

This whole thing is just perplexing.
Click to expand...

I differ from your opinion on this. Sky shares a lot of synergies with Comcast but rather than Comcast taking Sky's production capability away and merging it with NBCUniversal, Comcast expanded it and kept Sky independent. I think in the effect of WBD merger of Comcast will be similar with certain caveats especially when they are trying to generate content and gain marketshare of subs.

Warner Animation is a joke since it only put out films and deriative shows already produced and developed by the other studios already under WB (DC and Hanna Barbera specifically) so yes that specific studio is pointless as it produces things already being worked on by the substudios WB owns so its just a name placeholder to silo all animation. That can be done better. So it makes sense to get rid of it.

Likely what will happen is Universal will make a third animation studio under Cartoon Network Studios and place all the WB animated assets under there with a new leader supervised by Meledandri similar to Dreamworks. The three silos will like be Cartoon Network, Adult Swim, and Hanna Barbera.

Comcast does not have to sell CNN just because they own MSNBC...you can't own multiple news channels in terms of broadcast, cable news channels are a different story. The issue more so is with sport rights monopoly and Turner sports.
 
Disneyhead said:
The Matrix
Blade Runner
The "Vacation" series. Particularly for park use Wally World and Christmas Vacation.
Mad Max.
Willy Wonka
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles
Tom & Jerry.
Click to expand...
I'll admit i'd love a Blade Runner attraction, although i'm unsure what that would even be. Of course, does WB even have the rights to Blade Runner? They never were a production company on it for either movie. Yes they did distribute both movies, although they only have domestic distribution. Sony has international distribution and is listed as an actual production company.

Additionally, there's a Blade Runner 2099 series coming and it's not coming to HBO Max, but rather Amazon with Ridley Scott back as an executive producer. Reading through the article below, WB was not mentioned once. Then again, Blade Runner: Black Lotus (an anime series for Crunchyroll) showed that WB has the US rights, but Sony has the international rights for the franchise.
deadline.com

‘Blade Runner 2099’ Live-Action Sequel Series From Ridley Scott, Silka Luisa & Alcon In Works At Amazon Studios

The replicants are heading to the small-screen as Amazon Studios has put a live-action series in the Blade Runner universe into development.
deadline.com deadline.com
 
From a former Studio VP just retired from one of the Film Studios that lives next to me, related also. He's known Zazlav for a long time. He has a low opinion of him and says he has never had a good idea of what he's doing.
Sometimes we overestimate some of these Executives who climbed through the Peter Principle. So, trying to attach logic to their decisions might be giving them too much credit. :grin::lol:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nico
quinnmac000 said:
Comcast does not have to sell CNN just because they own MSNBC...you can't own multiple news channels in terms of broadcast, cable news channels are a different story. The issue more so is with sport rights monopoly and Turner sports.
Click to expand...
The US DOJ is very pro-business as it has shown, but there's no way in hell that they will be able to justify one company owning two of the three major cable news channels. That's then risking CNN and MSNBC merging and then there's less options for the consumer and thus by merging CNN with MSNBC, NBCUniversal now has no competition in the cable news space for those looking for a center/left perspective on things.

If they didn't let Disney own the regional sports networks (they didn't even have any regional networks before, so that was a bit of a tough call there imo), then they won't let Comcast own both CNN and MSNBC.
 
AlexanderMBush said:
Excluding TMNT (I think Viacom owns it outright now), that makes sense. Added RWBY in as-well, for what it meant more in western animation catering to Japanese too.
Click to expand...

Having watched RWBY and studying the fans/haters, I bet even the announcement of a RWBY attraction would be a Splash Mountain style controversy.
 
For me looking at it simply as a fan, the only thing to come out of this that would be truly beneficial as a consumer and couldn't be done through a partnership deal with WB (especially the way WB is currently being run) is that Peacock and whatever HBO Max turns into would merge meaning one less streaming service. That of course means people losing their jobs because there would be overlap in jobs, but let's be honest, there's just too many streaming services right now.

I'd rather we reconsolidate content a bit - remember when Netflix had a deal for pretty much every studios library? Those were the days. We'll never get back to that and quite frankly it's good that Netflix has competition. But instead of around 8-10 streaming services, i'd prefer around 5-6. Netflix, Disney+ (with Hulu and ESPN+ as tabs inside of the app), HBO Max/Peacock love child, Amazon Video, Apple TV+, and Paramount+. Smaller ones will continue to exist, but those will be the only ones of consequence.

I don't like these mergers and I know many of you don't, but they are happening. Part of why I don't like them is because we're losing part of film history in these mergers. WB is set to become 100 years old and it'll just be gobbled up. Fox is gone. MGM has been sold TWICE now. WB owns their library through the late 70's I believe and then now Amazon owns the new MGM. Lionsgate is prime to be sold, Sony's Entertainment division is something that is being floated, and you also have to think someone will try for HASBRO eventually, if only Hasbro Studios and access to not only the Transformers franchise, but anything based on a HASBRO property. A24 will also probably get bought out eventually, too.

By around 2030-ish, all entertainment companies will be owned by about five parent companies or so at this rate, which is pretty sad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pumpkinbot343, Mad Dog and DK745
Nick said:
For me looking at it simply as a fan, the only thing to come out of this that would be truly beneficial as a consumer and couldn't be done through a partnership deal with WB (especially the way WB is currently being run) is that Peacock and whatever HBO Max turns into would merge meaning one less streaming service. That of course means people losing their jobs because there would be overlap in jobs, but let's be honest, there's just too many streaming services right now.

I'd rather we reconsolidate content a bit - remember when Netflix had a deal for pretty much every studios library? Those were the days. We'll never get back to that and quite frankly it's good that Netflix has competition. But instead of around 8-10 streaming services, i'd prefer around 5-6. Netflix, Disney+ (with Hulu and ESPN+ as tabs inside of the app), HBO Max/Peacock love child, Amazon Video, Apple TV+, and Paramount+. Smaller ones will continue to exist, but those will be the only ones of consequence.

I don't like these mergers and I know many of you don't, but they are happening. Part of why I don't like them is because we're losing part of film history in these mergers. WB is set to become 100 years old and it'll just be gobbled up. Fox is gone. MGM has been sold TWICE now. WB owns their library through the late 70's I believe and then now Amazon owns the new MGM. Lionsgate is prime to be sold, Sony's Entertainment division is something that is being floated, and you also have to think someone will try for HASBRO eventually, if only Hasbro Studios and access to not only the Transformers franchise, but anything based on a HASBRO property. A24 will also probably get bought out eventually, too.

By around 2030-ish, all entertainment companies will be owned by about five parent companies or so at this rate, which is pretty sad.
Click to expand...
Yes, it's kind of a reboot of the 1970's when a similar thing happened with the various Studios that were experiencing severe financial difficulties. Studios were being passed around like a wild consort ..and yes....Way too many streaming services. There's bound to be a shakeout since most of this has been lots of red ink in search of future profits, which won't happen if the number of streamers continues to inflate. People can only watch so many shows and movies. Streaming loses it's effect when it becomes as expensive as cable, with less real choice overall, and commercials to boot in some cases. Streaming faces a real crisis in a couple years when the expected sky high profit expectations don't materialize, which is very likely.....Lots of rose colored glasses were sold when covid kept people home. That was a false signal, but the potential streamer companies bought it hook, line and sinker.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nick
Nick said:
For me looking at it simply as a fan, the only thing to come out of this that would be truly beneficial as a consumer and couldn't be done through a partnership deal with WB (especially the way WB is currently being run) is that Peacock and whatever HBO Max turns into would merge meaning one less streaming service. That of course means people losing their jobs because there would be overlap in jobs, but let's be honest, there's just too many streaming services right now.

I'd rather we reconsolidate content a bit - remember when Netflix had a deal for pretty much every studios library? Those were the days. We'll never get back to that and quite frankly it's good that Netflix has competition. But instead of around 8-10 streaming services, i'd prefer around 5-6. Netflix, Disney+ (with Hulu and ESPN+ as tabs inside of the app), HBO Max/Peacock love child, Amazon Video, Apple TV+, and Paramount+. Smaller ones will continue to exist, but those will be the only ones of consequence.

I don't like these mergers and I know many of you don't, but they are happening. Part of why I don't like them is because we're losing part of film history in these mergers. WB is set to become 100 years old and it'll just be gobbled up. Fox is gone. MGM has been sold TWICE now. WB owns their library through the late 70's I believe and then now Amazon owns the new MGM. Lionsgate is prime to be sold, Sony's Entertainment division is something that is being floated, and you also have to think someone will try for HASBRO eventually, if only Hasbro Studios and access to not only the Transformers franchise, but anything based on a HASBRO property. A24 will also probably get bought out eventually, too.

By around 2030-ish, all entertainment companies will be owned by about five parent companies or so at this rate, which is pretty sad.
Click to expand...
If only we had laws to stop this....ohhh wait we do and the government just refuses to stop mergers

Also while it sucks, it's how the western world works now. You have to merge or your stock will sink and even if your the best at doing what you can investors are the real issues because if they dont amazing returns most years they just sell off and go to another company.
So basically unless the USA starts enforcing laws they already have and do something to stop investors from basically ruining all companies this is just how it is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nick
Nick said:
The US DOJ is very pro-business as it has shown, but there's no way in hell that they will be able to justify one company owning two of the three major cable news channels. That's then risking CNN and MSNBC merging and then there's less options for the consumer and thus by merging CNN with MSNBC, NBCUniversal now has no competition in the cable news space for those looking for a center/left perspective on things.

If they didn't let Disney own the regional sports networks (they didn't even have any regional networks before, so that was a bit of a tough call there imo), then they won't let Comcast own both CNN and MSNBC.
Click to expand...
CNN can be divested and spun off into its own company or another option could be to have it phased out.
 
Nick said:
For me looking at it simply as a fan, the only thing to come out of this that would be truly beneficial as a consumer and couldn't be done through a partnership deal with WB (especially the way WB is currently being run) is that Peacock and whatever HBO Max turns into would merge meaning one less streaming service. That of course means people losing their jobs because there would be overlap in jobs, but let's be honest, there's just too many streaming services right now.

I'd rather we reconsolidate content a bit - remember when Netflix had a deal for pretty much every studios library? Those were the days. We'll never get back to that and quite frankly it's good that Netflix has competition. But instead of around 8-10 streaming services, i'd prefer around 5-6. Netflix, Disney+ (with Hulu and ESPN+ as tabs inside of the app), HBO Max/Peacock love child, Amazon Video, Apple TV+, and Paramount+. Smaller ones will continue to exist, but those will be the only ones of consequence.

I don't like these mergers and I know many of you don't, but they are happening. Part of why I don't like them is because we're losing part of film history in these mergers. WB is set to become 100 years old and it'll just be gobbled up. Fox is gone. MGM has been sold TWICE now. WB owns their library through the late 70's I believe and then now Amazon owns the new MGM. Lionsgate is prime to be sold, Sony's Entertainment division is something that is being floated, and you also have to think someone will try for HASBRO eventually, if only Hasbro Studios and access to not only the Transformers franchise, but anything based on a HASBRO property. A24 will also probably get bought out eventually, too.

By around 2030-ish, all entertainment companies will be owned by about five parent companies or so at this rate, which is pretty sad.
Click to expand...
If you had to make a guess, who do you think will snatch up Lionsgate? Paramount maybe?
 
Brian G. said:
They are all allegedly "Non-valuable" assets aka properties that have been deemed to be no longer money makers.
Click to expand...
I’m definitely curious - based on recent asset cuts, cancellations, and removals - how they are defining “non-valuable.” I think some of the products’ creators and fans have argued that they were valuable this year.

Edit: As a reminder, I am always Batman biased. So some “Batman films” has piqued my interest specifically. If I had to guess it would be Batman Forever and Batman & Robin as worse case. :lmao:

Edit Edit: Batman film music. Boo. Lol
 
Last edited:
Basically all of the old MGM film library minus the "classics" that still have value as film/merchandise (Wizard of Oz, Gone with the Wind, etc.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Book with our Travel Partners

MEI Travel

Latest posts

Share this page

Top Bottom
Back