Why I Hate Paramount Buying WBD
The Most Important Story of the Week for 3-Mar-2026
(Welcome to the “Most Important Story of the Week”, my bi-weekly strategy column analyzing the most important (but often not buzziest) news story of the last two weeks. I’m the Entertainment Strategy Guy, a former streaming executive who now analyzes business strategy in the entertainment industry. Please subscribe.)
The big story of the week/month/first quarter of 2026 is that Paramount finally raised their bid for all of Warner Bros. Discovery (notably acquiring the entire company, not just the studio), and Netflix didn’t raise their offer.
For now, we have a winner in the tragic race to consolidate the entertainment industry further.
Let’s not delay before getting into why I think this is a big deal. In today’s only-one-topic-focused “Most Important Story of the Week”, I’ll look at:
How this upsets the antitrust apple cart and could impact dealmaking going forward.
Three reasons why Netflix bowed out.
Why this makes strategic sense for Paramount Global…
…but the overwhelming reason this deal will likely fail.
What company I think every media company should acquire.
Who else may be up for sale, but why I don’t think more deals are imminent.
Anyways, a deal of this magnitude demands its own issue, so let’s dive in.
Most Important Story of the Week - Paramount Is Buying Warner Bros. Discovery Now
Let me give you a little bit of advice for the aspiring Substackers out there:
Don’t be predictable or cliched.
A lot of folks think the key to big Substack growth is either to hate fiercely on something or to alternatively hype up the latest trends, but here’s the twist: they’re hyping up or hating on the same things as everyone else. Usually, I can read ten other folks making that same case.
Most of all, I just find it boring, being brutally honest. If you hype the same things as everyone else, you’re likely late to the party. You hate the same things everyone else hates, bravo, you buy into the consensus. And you don’t get ahead doing the same things as everyone else.
The most common example of this? Bashing on legacy studios. Good for you, but I read that take all the time. At its worst, it boils down to:
Big Tech good/brilliant
Old Hollywood bad/dumb/stupid.
The folks I follow and recommend, in contrast, tend to see a more nuanced world. And they have nuanced takes on different businesses (some hate Netflix; some see flaws in YouTube’s dominance, especially some of their willingness to share data and its impact on workers; some see smart strategies in legacy media too; some like Amazon and Apple, but also understanding they’re probably losing money!).
When it comes to Netflix, specifically, at its worst, the takes really do boil down to this:
Heads, Netflix wins
Tails, Traditional Hollywood loses
And maybe, yeah, long term that’s right, though I wouldn’t bet on it. History can change pretty quickly. (Remember back when Disney was dominating the entertainment industry, checks notes, seven years ago?)
That analysis, though, seemed to dominate after Netflix backed out of their bid to buy Paramount. Netflix wins the bid? Netflix wins. Netflix loses the bid? Netflix wins. If Netflix had had their merger overturned years later? Netflix would still win (using some sort of three-dimensional chess of harming Warner Bros. for a few years). If Netflix had never bid at all? They’d still have won.
Netflix can only win.
The reality is more nuanced. Netflix’s executives clearly saw something they needed in Warner Bros. And Paramount is right to try to buy all of Warner Bros. Discovery, but the price will likely crush the deal. But the regulatory implications will likely have the biggest consequences going forward.
So unlike last time, let’s start with the antitrust implications, then move to the strategy.
Antitrust Gains Steam
To open with a bit of personal pique, I am a bit miffed my name doesn’t get tossed around with the other folks who oppose consolidation in the entertainment and media spaces. (The exceptions being Matthew Stoller and David Dayen, who have consistently promoted my work.)
So if you want a reading list of why to oppose media consolidation, check out what I’ve written.
First off, here’s my article from December
Most importantly, here’s my seven-point plan to “save” Hollywood” from last year.
Here’s my article on how Kamala Harris should embrace antitrust, from way back in Nov-2024, when few people in Hollywood cared about this issue.
When the strikes ended, I recommended, you guessed it, getting involved in antitrust! (No one listened to me.)
I could go on, with articles from 2020, 2023 and 2024. I was also tossing cold water on the actual state of M&A going back to 2019! The point is, yes, I’m a smaller independent analyst/journalist, but I’ve been on this corner! For years!
But to be clear, I’m a big tent guy, so even if you’re late getting on the pro-competition bus, welcome! Let’s get to work.
Paramount-Skydance Winning the WBD Prize Still Faces Big Legal/Regulatory Challenges
You may not have seen this story—though I know a lot of my readers overlap with Matthew Stoller’s—but the California Attorney General Rob Bonta (remember that name) recently filed suit against Amazon, alleging they colluded with retailers to raise prices.
I bring this up because, if true, that’s a huge issue for the American economy, another piece of evidence that we don’t have enough competition in our marketplace, and consumers pay the price (as do aspiring competitors). That’s bad!
But most folks didn’t see this story! It barely made a political wrinkle! And that’s how most antitrust/competition stories go.
That’s why the Paramount deal does feel significant, as it really did make waves. Folks seem to be genuinely upset at what transpired and how it went down. While the antitrust movement gained steam during the Biden administration, the issue still didn’t become a priority for the Democratic Party. The recent Trump/Paramount-Skydance machinations here really could change that, with big impacts for Hollywood
Some thoughts:
While I think there are obviously bad uses of “everyone”, I mean it when I say this: “everyone in America loves film and television”. People love movies! That’s just true. Because so many people love TV and film (their deaths by social media have been wildly overstated), these mergers make front page news.
Meanwhile, the machinations of this deal seem fairly egregious—with the Netflix deal collapsing under Republican/Trump pressure—and likely to hurt customers, so this could start a genuine anti-consolidation pushback.
The name to watch is California’s Attorney General, Rob Bonta, and maybe European regulators. If either files suit, this deal could drag on for years. I’d bet one or both do. They’ll have a tougher time than the feds, but could still stall the deal.
Who does Hollywood want to win? At first, I thought Netflix, but now I think Hollywood is divided. Some folks wanted Netflix because of political reasons. Netflix is still viewed as a Democratic-Party-aligned company, while countless people, especially pundits, hate CBS News new politics and dread the Ellisons taking control of CNN. Plus, Netflix is much stronger financially. But some of the folks who prioritize theatrical seem to be pro-Paramount. I tend to think that crowd is right about theaters, but losing a major studio will still likely decrease the number of films made per year.
Which deal is worse in terms of antitrust considerations? It’s tough to say! If you focus on the future, that means streaming, and I’d say it’s easily Netflix. If you focus on everything else, it’s easily Paramount, who may actually gain majority market share in something like cable TV.
From a competition standpoint, either owner is bad for Hollywood, by which I mean a vibrant industry that shares profits with talent, customers and shareholders. No matter who won this deal, it would be bad from that standpoint.
So yes, lest there be any confusion, I oppose it! (As I did Netflix buying Warner Bros.)
Bottom line: I expect much more pushback now, though I could be wrong. Many Democrats, both in Hollywood and nationally, will oppose the Ellisons taking over CNN, creating a political coalition to stop this deal. Regardless of what generated the pushback, it will still push back.
Longer term, politicized deal-making is bad for deal-making. (Or bad for the economy if it doesn’t get stopped.) We’ll see how that situation evolves going forward.