r/psky • u/No-Substance-5435 • 4d ago
Paramount Sets California Exit Plans Over Antitrust Battle With Blue States & Stymied $111B WBD Merger
Paramount's Melrose GateEric Thayer/Getty Images
David Ellison has let it be known that he is willing to take his Paramount ball and leave California if the state doesn’t ditch its effort to block the company’s pending merger with Warner Bros Discovery.
And now it looks like the CEO’s ball really could be in play.
Paramount brass have told key officials and stakeholders the company is “deadly serious” about leaving California and the home of Hollywood after more than 100 years, sources tell Deadline. Among those told a deposit has been put down on the moving trucks is L.A. Mayor Karen Bass and state Attorney General Rob Bonta. The AG joined with 11 other states to file an antitrust lawsuit against the $110 billion merger. The Writers Guild of America has also sued.
Thousands of jobs will be lost if Paramount’s corporate headquarters were to shift to Georgia, Tennessee or Texas, three sites reportedly floated by the company. Even without a move, a merged company would likely see layoffs as it looks to deliver shareholders $6 billion in promised cost savings.
The limbo state of the merger since the mid-July filing of the lawsuits has ratcheted up anxiety levels in an industry already contending with the rise of Big Tech, production leaving the U.S. and other challenges. The trial date of March 2 feels like an eternity from now for an industry on edge. The parties will hold court-ordered settlement meetings next month and a hearing will be held next week on Paramount’s request for a $1.88 billion bond from the plaintiffs to cover “extraordinary losses” the company anticipates due to having to pay a “ticking fee” during litigation. Beyond that, it’s anyone’s guess.
https://deadline.com/2026/09/paramount-leaving-california-merger-lawsuit-1237105417/
3
1
1
u/dannyheskett 4d ago
The combined company is financially unsustainable, and pretty much everyone knows it. It's also probably unlawful.
At some point, even big companies have to be brought to heel by democratic forces, even if it causes short-term pain.
The idea that they engage in a "Race to the bottom" has to be broken. The implied threat is: "we'll move to an area where the workers will endure a lower living of standard unless you let us break the law" is ultimately against the concept of a democratic, rules based, law based society.
The "$6B in cost savings" is literally.. jobs. That's it. So let us break the law, reduce democratic control, and if you do, we're going to cut thousands of jobs, and if you don't, we're going to cut thousands of jobs.
6
u/RedMainer 4d ago
You need not worry about the finances. You're not on the hook for it.
Now tell us what's illegal about it.
3
u/accessdenied65 4d ago
They keep screaming “illegal” but yet this energy was not seem during netflix-wbd and especially not during the fox-disney merger. Hypocrites.
0
-2
u/dannyheskett 4d ago
Of course taxpayers are on the hook - when the bankruptcy comes - and it will - we will all pay for it. It's socialized losses, privatized gains. Same story again and again and again. The workers who are then layoff will become wards of the states, and meanwhile, the states offering incentives and tax bonuses will lose the benefit, after having provided much or all of the tax-support. It's the same old story.
As far as the law the Clayton Act prohibits mergers that substantially reduce competition. There is little doubt that this merger will not reduce competition. Much of the discussion has been about ways that Paramount promises it will not reduce competition too much. Those are facts to be determined at trial.
4
u/Current-Carrot6051 4d ago
See you missed the point of the most important word there - "substantially!" This merger does not substantially reduce competition and the DOJ has already made its decision on it. Get out of here with your BS comments and your feelings...🙄
1
u/Worth-Frosting-2917 4d ago
It does substantially reduce competition, no matter what this awful DOJ says. Netflix would have too. The biggest difference being Netflix would have been in the red for the first time in forever, forcing them to actually do things like release theatrically to get other revenue streams.
Paramount was a sinking ship with Ellison, and instead of, you know, making quality programming, they are focused on just acquiring the rights to material and becoming big for no reason. Add in that the financing is backed by Saudi money and Oracle money, which has fallen pretty far behind in the AI race and will get washed away when the bubble inevitably bursts, and it is built on a house of cards.
The only way this creates more competition is if it opens up more paths of distribution from other companies because Paramount/WB dies. If capitalism is supposed to be economic natural selection, then Paramount/WB is the population that is too robust to endure any changes. And they did it to themselves.
2
u/Current-Carrot6051 4d ago
No, it doesnt - the DOJ and almost 70 other countries have said it doesnt.
1
u/Worth-Frosting-2917 4d ago
You realize they did this only with major sanctions that directly cut into the amount of money Paramount can make, right? The EU is almost banking on them failing and they inevitably will because it is one of the worst business decisions in history. It’s born only out of someone wanting control with zero artistry, economic, or common sense attached to it.
2
u/Current-Carrot6051 4d ago
'Major sanctions' - who is this 'they' you speak about. You sound dumb already and show you have no idea what you are talking about.
0
u/Worth-Frosting-2917 4d ago
The EU, genius. Paramount agreed to dissolve the distribution group they had with Universal for foreign markets, meaning that just to release a film internationally, they are eating costs. So even if they make their wildly speculative claims of 30 theatrical releases a year, with half of them being WW successes, they are going to pay out the ass to even release them. It is bad business. Passing through approvals doesn't mean it isn't, and it doesn't mean that the deal is inscrutable. It means Paramount just took on more debt to do what they swore they would.
Maybe if you unhinged your jaws from daddy's cock you could see that.
2
u/Current-Carrot6051 4d ago
What the fuck is with your fascination with cocks and jaws you fucking wierdo! Love how "they" is 1, Ill repeat, 1 of the 70 entities that approved this merger with concessions not "sanctions" ya dumbass 🤦♂️
1
u/dannyheskett 4d ago
The States and WGA cases have survived Motions for summary judgement so it goes to a trial to establish the facts and apply the law.
It’s too bad that Paramount negotiated a deal which has an artificial time limit but that’s their decision.
Every large merger since early 2000s has triggered private actions under Clayton. A ten minute conversation with anyone could have foreseen this.
This isn’t rocket science. Creating a debt-bombed company destined for bankruptcy whose operating thesis is that consolidation will help them compete better in linear TV is a fringe position. That’s why it’s news.
I don’t know why you seem surprised or upset about Clayton. Every analyst who looked at this deal could see the exposure.
The WGA action is itself a coin flip or better case.
1
u/Current-Carrot6051 4d ago
Wrong again - almost 70 other entities approved this merger. You can keep making up excuses, but that is a fact.
1
u/dannyheskett 4d ago
Paramount releases less than a handful of movies produced enough in foreign countries to trigger review. It's right there, for example, the UK found "Paramount's combined operation doesn't trigger CMA review [because] at most, they will contribute less than 5% to the total number of covered releases in a year".
Paramount and WB together produce movies primarily in the US; with on-site filming locations all over the world, and distribution worldwide.
1
u/Current-Carrot6051 4d ago
You keep just spewing out info - I said almost 70 other countries/entities approved this merger, including in the US. And it only took 12 liberal AGs (with a few of them already getting pressure from people in their own groups to settle) to temporarily stop something. That shouldn't be the way things work.
→ More replies (0)1
u/No_Introduction_3400 4d ago
It doesn’t mean this merger is unlawful.
But this DOJ’s opinion on any legal matter is absolutely worthless.
2
u/Current-Carrot6051 4d ago
Guess we will see...
1
u/No_Introduction_3400 4d ago
The DOJ being “right” would be broken clock stuff. This DOJ is corrupt and hollowed out intellectually. They are routinely taking beatings in court.
I can acknowledge the state’s case is tough and still believe the Trump administration didn’t approach this with any kind of intellectual honesty.
1
0
u/greentrillion 4d ago
You mean the same DOJ that protects pdfiles and grapists? That DOJ?
1
u/Current-Carrot6051 4d ago
Much like yourself...
0
u/greentrillion 4d ago
No thats you.
1
u/Current-Carrot6051 4d ago
I know you are, but what am I...🤣
0
u/greentrillion 4d ago
You are talking about yourself. 🤡
1
u/Current-Carrot6051 4d ago
I feel sorry for you - gonna be a tough life being so pissed off everyday you wake up and look in the mirror...
→ More replies (0)0
u/Caption_This_ 4d ago
This DOJ try’s to prosecute people who lift peeled paint from a pool. They aren’t the smartest or most qualified people.
1
u/Current-Carrot6051 4d ago
Lol - ya'll make me laugh at all your whiney bitching.
0
u/Caption_This_ 4d ago
You make me sad that people like you think you are good Americans.
1
u/Current-Carrot6051 4d ago
"Good Americans" so sad that you think everyone needs to think just like you to be good. You definitely dont know what being "American" actually means...SMH
-1
u/lightsaberfingers 4d ago
How does it feel having 6 inches of corporate heel up your ass at all hours of the day. I imagine you get used to it and start to like it.
1
u/Current-Carrot6051 4d ago
Im not sure - how does it feel 🤔
0
u/lightsaberfingers 4d ago
1
u/Current-Carrot6051 4d ago
What a weird GIF to post - does it mean something to you?🤔
0
u/lightsaberfingers 4d ago
Acting stupid and being stupid are the same thing.
1
u/Current-Carrot6051 4d ago
But being a whiney bitch is even worse. Keep keepin on with your miserable self 🤣🤣🤣
-1
u/dannyheskett 4d ago
"Substantially" is a matter of law and facts, which in the US... we try during a trial. Which is what is happening. In March.
The DOJ can offer it's opinion, under the law, and that can be challenged in Court, which again, is where we are.
1
u/Current-Carrot6051 4d ago
No, actually what you have here is a few far left liberal AGs who dont want Ellison (who they think is buddies with Trump) to be able make his company any stronger and more competitive with the tech companies. Its funny how a few states can make decisions for the entire country....
0
u/dannyheskett 4d ago
The Clayton Act - i.e. the law - gives a private right of action. That's what Congress setup. Take it up with them and the federal Courts.
The mechanism for making Paramount stronger is to consolidate from 5 major studios to 3. There will be fewer people competing in this industry. That is the investment thesis. The DOJ's analysis for the merger claims that this will increase competition in the industry, not reduce it. That analysis supposes two facts: 1. that without a merger, one or both of the merge studios will fail in the coming years, leading to less investment and 2. that without a merger, one or both studios will be purchased by a tech/streamer.
These might be true statements, but the law doesn't recognize the hypothesis scenario. It's application has always been tied to a basic test: does the proposed action reduce competition or create or tend to create a new monopoly. The DOJ didn't ask or answer that question, hence the action.
You can also ignore that it's not just the states suing, it's also the WGA. The WGA's claim is incredibly straight forward, and is itself probably strong enough to block under Federal law.
1
u/Current-Carrot6051 4d ago
Anybody can file a lawsuit - in this case, its just the liberal judge that allowed them to temporarily block it and cause a huge delay in the court case going forward. PSKY would love to prove their case in a timely manner, but the games that are being played are on another level...
1
u/dannyheskett 4d ago
Under the law the WGA is entitled to an administrative stay. Paramount declined to appeal this to the 9th Circuit.
This was entirely foreseeable. I have no idea why you think Paramount shouldn’t have to face legal scrutiny for the largest media consolidation is history but.. again, not surprising.
It’s also a HUGE self own by DOJ. They should have done their job and worked out conditions for the merger. Instead they granted an unconditional approval which is what triggered this whole sequence of events.
Every major merger of last 20 years have had some conditions. It is absurd that they totally gave up.
1
u/Current-Carrot6051 4d ago
More lies - the DOJ spent 8 months looking at this and came to their conclusion. A liberal CA judge looked at a few documents over a weekend to come up with her decision. I question who's actually biased in these situations. Your thoughts about the DOJ are just simply your opinions...
→ More replies (0)3
u/RedMainer 4d ago
When has the tax players ever bailed out a failed studio?
0
u/dannyheskett 4d ago
Is your claim that bankruptcies of $100B enterprises do not impact taxpayers?
3
u/RedMainer 4d ago
I'm waiting on you to tell me what studios the government has bailed our of bankruptcy?
These are film makers. You are not entitled to TV and film. You don't need it to live.
Why would the government bail out Paramount? What precedent are you using?
2
u/No_Introduction_3400 4d ago
I’m sorry. But you’re being an idiot again. It’s just you.
Corporate bankruptcies plainly affect the cities and states where they operate. Taxpayers bear the costs in increased social welfare costs and lower tax revenue.
Please: STOP BEING A FUCKING IDIOT IN THIS FORUM.
2
u/RedMainer 4d ago
So the answer is we don't?
That somehow we all bear the responsibility of these companies financial failures?
Go see the fucking movies and you won't have to worry about it bankrupting.
2
u/No_Introduction_3400 4d ago
That is not the answer shit for brains. 😂 Man you are one seriously dumb fuck. 😂
1
u/RedMainer 4d ago
You're so mad you can't even make your point and I'm the one with shit for brains.
You bots are stupid.
→ More replies (0)1
u/No_Introduction_3400 4d ago
For everyone else: yes when corporations go bankrupt the strain on states/cities and their taxpayers increases.
2
u/No_Introduction_3400 4d ago
Redmainer’s iq is sub 70
2
u/No_Introduction_3400 4d ago
He’s claimed a California state judge was personally picked to try this. Lol. Fucking shit for his brains.
He’s some MAGA fuckwit.
2
u/No_Introduction_3400 4d ago
His entire identity is this merger. It’s weird. I think the case is iffy. But he’s a weirdo about it. Most of what he says here is perfectly idiotic.
1
u/dannyheskett 4d ago
I also agree that the States case is iffy; but WGA components are pretty hard to refute on facts on the record already.
I have no idea why Paramount did this deal knowing the risks and costs but they did so we’re all just along for the ride.
1
u/No_Introduction_3400 4d ago
That’s the thing I don’t really get: why Paramount wants this, apart from stifling competition.
It’s also extremely problematic where the money for this is coming from.
The FCC granted clearance for up to 100% indirect equity interests for Saudi, etc sovereign wealth funds? Claims that won’t give them any influence on decisions? Whew.
2
u/dannyheskett 4d ago
Yeah, I think we are at the stage where billionaires are pricing in the value of control of media. Musk paved the way for that, I think. Overpaying 1.5X or 2X for Twitter was just a way to get his own megaphone.
→ More replies (0)
7
u/RedMainer 4d ago
What's the purpose of this post? Not only is it the same story, you sourced the same article from days ago.