If this had been a couple years ago, I'd be all for WB owning Paramount. But, now that Discovery owns WB, I'm totally against it. Discovery has destroyed every entertainment property they've touched outside of house renovation shows.
Sadly, Disney has been running this playbook with their acquisitions too. Meanwhile, Amazon has their own problems. What a world where Netflix and Apple are the only media companies that seem to have a firm hand on the wheel.
@@harrypothead42024Jack Warner's legacy from the days of the Studio System. He was a real SOB who liked to tie actors up in multi-year contracts, then he would treat them like shyte.
Federation Dream Home, Cardassian Beach Hunters, oooo RISA LIFE... thats a good one, Amazing Romulan Homes... gosh there are so many to choose from 🤣 Oh c'mon that was GOLD! Id stay away from House Hunters Feranginar... its not my style. 🤪
I would love to see a creation of Star Trek Studios or even a generic studio for the production of Space Opera in general that happened to own all of Star Trek.
Only if Abrams and Kurtzman aren't allowed to own voting shares, either directly, or indirectly through holding companies, investment companies, etc. Sort of like setting up CC&Rs to the new entity that forbid those two them from having any control in any way for the next 50 years. (The time limit is because perpetual agreements aren't typically legally binding).
@danjager6200 but Disney could sue, alleging that they took that name from Star Wars: A New Hope. I really like the name, but I'm not sure if it would clear legal.
Paramount did it to themselves they broke themselves because of poor oversight bad management. Spending like drunken Sailors on questionable product. Not understanding or appreciating your customer base putting out schlocky merchandise if at all not knowing how to Market your IPS
With the current state Disney is in, they need to sell off 20th Century Fox (now 20th Century Studios) and that unit's library. I heard Lachlan Murdoch is now in charge of both Fox Corp AND News Corp., and he didn’t like it when Rupert Murdoch, his father, sold 20th.
wow, sounds like a big mess going on in the streaming world! I just hope Star Trek remains intact! "Star Trek Studios" is probably not a bad idea, that way you have a team that's in charge of them and owns the IP, and if someone else buys them, fine, but production of Star Trek remains stable. Hopefully that would be for both streaming and movies and TV. 🙂
Yeah, there were already WAY too many media companies controlling everything that comes out of the entertainment industry. Maybe if people who call themselves sci-fi "fans" actually had curiosity and support for new ideas we could have a thriving popular culture. Instead, it's sad to watch the end times for entertainment lurch forward inexorably.
Thank you for this information. As a Paramount "owner", my concern is strictly about the future value of my stock. That value is very much related to the sales negotiations. Recently, Warren Buffet and Berkshire-Hathaway cut their ownership interest in Paramount, so someone must have been buying Paramount shares on the cheap as the price has dropped. Thank God there appear to be interested buyers out there.
Paramount is one of last old school studios left standing. As such, the Paramount name and logo still carry a lot of weight, so any future owner will almost certainly keep the Paramount name.
Here in NY, the WB deal is dead... The market reacted negatively to this deal and it's been dead since it was announced. Not sure why anyone is talking about this deal.
The problem with Netflix absorbing Max and Paramount, would be anti-trust concerns. It might not pass the US governments sniff test in that department. No one else could realistically compete with that on the same scale.
It will be allowed because they will still be sold as seperate channels.. and a bundle.. if merging into one you’d be right 100%. and the belief is if Disney can buy fox, anything is a go.
@@scitrek They might be offered separately or bundled, but still controlled by the same company. It's akin to having a single cable company, but saying that's ok, because you don't have to buy the package that has all the channels. It's still an anti-trust issue because one entity controls it all or controls enough to make the competition irrelevant.
After the FTC came after Microsoft, I don't see this being approved without big concessions. FTC is foolishly still fighting Microsoft. Microsoft will not buy Paramount despite having Halo on that streaming service.
It was a mistake to put Star Trek behind a paywall. I have a business question. Phil Spencer CEO of Xbox just had a podcast. He said they have to grow or they have to lay people off. Why can't they have a business model that is status quo to keep what they have? Why must companies grow? Why can't a business survive on revenue alone? Is it because they are a publicly traded company? Why can't dividends be good enough? It sounds like a business model to cater to investors that want to buy low and sell high. I'm wildly guessing. How does this all work?
With the lack of studio space,, especially in LA, wouldn't be more profitable/advantageous for WB to spin off the studio space to a different division and lease/rent out the space to other productions? Sure, selling it off would significantly lower their debt, but I'm sure they could make move, even in the short run, by keeping it. Thoughts? As to a joint venture with Skydance/Allen, I don't think this would bode well for Allen. It is my understanding that CBS still holds the TV rights for ST and Paramount has only limited permission to produce TV of ST (am I wrong?). If the Skydance /Allen thing went through, Skydance, which is successful with movies is good to go, but Allen, who knows TV, would still have to do an agreement with CBS on the TV or outright buy the rights (big money would have to change hands) and he would be out the investment money with Skydance AND a huge chunk with CBS. It seems like a Lose/Lose situation to me
Would be interesting if WB merged with Paramount, transfer the Star Trek IP, and other such franchises to the Paramount name from CBS side, then sell CBS to Byron Allen with the studio space.
If Star Trek were done, like you said buying out secret hideout, merging the Star Trek IP into one studio, and spun off into it's own division. Though I would add they should license it to the fan films, where they could actually earn money as long as Star Trek got their cut.
That would be putting Star Trek in the hands of the fans who would have several different ways to take Star Trek, which I don't think would be great at all.
I expect a split-up sale. Warner wants the IP, but not the studio lot and probably not CBS. Skydance wants the studio lot, but not CBS and probably not most of the IP. Byron Allen wants CBS, but not the studio lot and IP. I am defining wanting the IP as wanting to make new products with it, as they would all be happy with licensing out the back catalog. I suspect they will negotiate with each other to minimize their costs, and make a joint offer where each gets the part they want most.
What a mess! I wonder what Jack Warner the founder of Warner Brothers would think of this. Apparently, this all started when Paramount had big dreams of money pouring in from its streaming services. Now it seems that another iconic name is about to disappear due to management ineptitude & the desire to take advantage of that. I am concerned about how this effects Star Trek but even more importantly the many people who will lose employment through no fault of their own. Those at the top will do Ok but as it is the case with this sort of upheaval those in the mid to lower ranks will be screwed. As if living in California isn't bad enough at the moment. The rushing water is symbolic of not only our screwing up the planet but many the many jobs that are going to be swept away with Paramount's "re-birth."
Star Trek will finish out season three of Strange New Worlds and Discovery will air its last season. After that, those shows should be wrapped up. There's plenty of old shows to last a lifetime even if nothing new is produced again. Star Trek could end gracefully before it just becomes a soap opera. Lots of fans hate the new series like Picard and Discovery and won't watch them.
Do you live in California? Been living here since 1984 and wouldn’t live anywhere else. Came from Missouri which is a dysfunctional hell hole now. I see tons of out of state license plates driving around my town. People come to California for vacations. If California is terrible for someone , they can always leave.
@@bigdougscommentary5719 I was not referring to living in California. I was referring to Paramount's situation which is a mess. Eventually it will be resolved but at the cost of many jobs. Upper management will probably do OK. Regarding living in Missouri, I am more than happy to continue to live in NJ.
@@josephfilm73whoever gets the rights to Star Trek, should lock all the newer shows into a vault, to never see the light of day again. Then, film new shows that follow the canon.
Consolidation of streaming services is I believe inevitable. There's too many fragmented ones at present and the economics of that can't be very good. As long as there's enough for divers programming and a smaller but competitive environment. And keeping creative teams that work is critical.
I think having their own Star trek studio, is a good idea, if they can get rid of Klutzman and J.J. who really don't like trek nor have any real appreciation for what they have. However the idea of a dedicated studio and team for trek productions is merely wishful thinking, until Warner Bros. negotiates their way through the financial minefield of the stock holders to finalize the purchase.
I've stuck by my theory that one day, there will be maybe two or one large conglomerate that will oversee all of the archives from major studios and TV companies from around the world. All that will remain is the logos or production houses who financed or made the production. The current shifting sands of companies gradually being merged or sold up certainly will occur as time moves forward. Streaming is still on target to be the dominant media entertainment hub for the global populations. People keep saying that streaming is finished. Well, streaming isn't finished. Streaming was only really born 2019 during the Covid pandemic, and is currently still only an infant. There's still many years of fine tuning and development to achieve.
MGM's roar is still around, though they no longer own their studio space, have nothing to do with the Vegas casinos, sold off most of their memorabilia decades ago and Warner owns all their films before 1986.
It's no fun watching the streaming companies form into a new ultramega cable company. once they congeal into a single mass of IP, I'm sure prices for streaming will go through the roof the way cable did.
As long as Walt Disney and Catherine Kennedy do not get their hands on Paramount, whatever happens is something I will accept. I feel that way because Catherine Kennedy has ruined so many franchises, and just near destroyed the lives and carriers of a many great movie stars.
If Paramount is sold, that would leave Warner Bros, NBC/Universal, Sony Pictures, and Disney as the remaining major studios left. Concentrating media power into fewer companies never turns out better for the public. Just look at the last 15-20 years of movies. Most of them are unoriginal, soulless, factory-made, focus group tested, "safe", and devoid of any real substance and are made for people with 30 second attention spans. A point about the FCC. They have a say in the approval process. But that only concerns ownership of television production for over the air broadcasts and cable. Streaming is not regulated by the FCC. Streaming, motion picture production and distribution would be regulated by the FTC.
A Hybrid deal could be interesting in some odd ways. Personally I think it's better to keep IP owner ship unified. Just look at the problem Marvel has with Spiderman in the MCU.
This sounds like another repeat of the Time-Warner / Turner Broadcasting deal from the 90s. Warner Bros was equally confused over what to do with Hanna-Barbera Studios and Cartoon Network.
Painful for me to see. I live in Pittsburgh. Westinghouse Broadcasting was close with CBS and in the 90's bought CBS outright. Seeing CBS tossed around is seeing Westinghouse fully forgotten.
After all is said and done, I predict there will be 5 big services left: Netflix (Max, Paramount, and of course Netflix), Disney (Hulu, ESPN, and Disney), Amazon, Peacock,and Apple.
With all the backroom / boardroom wheeling and dealing, it's a wonder that any project gets made at all. Meanwhile all the fans want is for these things to go ahead in some sort of concrete way. Hopefully things will settle out soon.
As it stands, WB won't legally be allowed by FCC to purchase Paramount. Too many segments of WB and Paramount overlap in such as way that FCC would require both entities to spin off or sell holdings to become a non-monopoly business.
Thank you for this very detailed and well-researched explanation of this situation - much appreciated. While WB certainly has a lot of debt, I would expect that they will be able to offer the most cash to Sheri Redstone/National Amusements and so they will be the winners of this. They, in turn, will look to unload stuff they don't want/need, such as excess real estate and CBS. As for our beloved Star Trek, I think that its proven to be very valuable when done correctly (Picard Season 3, for example) so, in any case, I would expect that it will continue as before to a great extent.
Can you do an addendum of the potential effect on The Orville from the pending Paramount sale? After all, The Orville is like a "sister" universe to Star Trek.
The fact that they're posting SO MANY things saying they know we want it but we're not getting it.... It's all PR to press out buttons and drum up the desire before announcing that they've decided to 'listen to fans" and listen to the 'success of Picard" and that they will give us Legacy. Why else is everyone like Patrick Stewart, DeLancie, Jeri Ryans, and Matalas making so many comments about it. They don't say anything else they're told to.
Highly possibly that wb will buy it and sell cbs/bet to allen and the film studio to skydance and load then with bet and keep the leftovers and ip after a few write downs the old zaslav special. I don't see a reason Netflix would buy wb.
I think if Paramount is sold there is a good chance the new owners could ignore the sunk cost in shows like Star Trek Discovery and move forward with a clean sheet as if they never happened. they would put a priority on having the IP make money.
Wow. I didn't know that Paramount was up for sale. I expect that there will be more studio sales as the movie industry contracts. Movie theater attendance will continue to decline. Unfortunately, streaming services cannot generate the same revenue of the old business model. Warners would do well in selling off Paramount assets, especially the real estate.
But who would you honestly get to make "decent Star Trek" and what would even be considered decent these days that's not already in limbo in terms of The Orville?
Disney wouldn't be able to get it, as they own ABC, their own named channel, Disney XD, Nat Geo, FX, Fox, among other channels. It would be a monooply & that's why it would be an issue.
I'm a little confused, particularly on the type of debt WB has as you say. What legally or financially is stopping one or more of the dozens of institutional investors that own WB from just cranking out the cash needed to slay the purchase, if not assuage some of the debt issues?
@@scitrek Well, I guess I am really asking, why wouldn't, say, BlackRock, State Street, or Vanguard make offerings of the cash needed by WB to make the purchase, in exchange for just a larger equity or more shares in WB? Or extend it as a loan? I wonder the same with Disney too: why would an institutional _owner_ of a security *not* capitalize on either a credit-lending opportunity or equity-gaining opportunity...or find some other way to exploit its asset by injecting it with cash?
I'm a day one fan of Star Trek, all of them. I got into streaming because cable prices got out of control. Then,.some, like Paramount, wanted to start charging to watch, it's just too much like cable, start low then jack the price too high (I still don't know how you pay them) until they intrude into other bills. I said I wouldn't pay Paramount a dime, but I'm waffling on that, I need my Star Trek. Sure, it's fiction, imperialistic, and ideal. You can't choose what you fall in love with, not really.
Streaming services are too expensive and too limited, I see the excitement in combining them but it's the new content that is fuelling the market and that is still spread across the industry, hence very little change here.
Great job! Yeah these streaming services are a mess! CBS is the only real channel I still watch a lot of shows on! Like all the NCIS’s and Blue Bloods! It’s going to be really hard when that show ends!
We have six francizes with confused IP and resulting legal messes. Star trek is split between two or three teams two movie/ TV and one older game IP. Star Wars is in an out right state of civil war. Star Gate is split between two companies that will not work together. They also broke Doctor Who and now the best Dr Who stuff comes from fans outside the BBC. Amazon somehow figured out how to wreck lord of the Rings. The Pokémon Verses Palworld mess is because the former trained up hundreds of artists two years ago but don't have a project for them since and can't legally do PC games so Pocket Pair, founded by a former junior employee, has snapped up the skilled artists and did the PC game everyone wants. (except Nintendo's handheld device manufacturers.) It strikes me that someone somewhere is either going to have to innovate greatly and in the process give these guys and gals all good scare. Where's the Orville when you really need it.
The sad truth about Paramount is that they could have done better. They could have made Real Star Trek un Tainted Bad Robot/Secret Hideout Away from Alex Kurtzman. Instead of Terminating Alex, they kept him and let him run amok with Garbage Trek. If Paramount wants the majority of the Fanbase. Terminate Alex Kurtzman and Sever Star Trek from Secret Hideout. And you can begin to get some money back.
What you suggest is opposite of what SciTrek seems to think is the best option that Paramount might have, considering that Secret Hideout controls elements of Star Trek but not the entire IP itself. I know that your idea would be to cleave off Secret Hideout, but that would mean also getting rid of elements that someone else coming into the IP couldn't use if they wanted to. I get that you don't think those elements that were created are anything but smelly turds, but you don't know what it is that someone else may look at, correct?
The idea of Netflix running paramount’s streaming is a very clever idea. A bit like how (back in the day) some smaller search engines were powered by the biggies. Just really rebadging the Netflix tech with a paramount front end. That’s a very clever way to do it. Makes paramount able to have a service but without having to worry about the infrastructure.. just pay Netflix to do it all 😁
Bottom line is , if Paramount had made Trek series that fans and people actually wanted to see, they would have made money with them and even more off the merchandise. And then they would not be in trouble. So stupid. So avoidable and yet inevitable in current year mindset.
WBD does not need more studio space? Post pandemic, Disney and Netflix used a lot of WBD Burbank space. What does WBD do? Levels the storied external "The Ranch" space in Burbank for more stages. Yep that's the plan, more stages. Wandavision was shot on the Ranch in front of the Lethal Weapon house. So if Paramount studios was bought by WBD, they would likely sell it to a stage maintenance group or keep it for themselves. Not sell it to someone else to use. Stages are still VERY popular in LA County.
@@scitrek okay then. I'm just saying selling the paramount lot when stages are still in dire need and the industry is so fractured (in a good way, IMO) that a full/uncontrolled sale seemed unlikely.
@@cjplay2the way it’s been explained to me is they will keep enough to do what they want.. and sell some to bring in a cash injection. They will need a short term cash injection to off set costs
These past few years Star Trek shows have really declined. I haven’t watched any Picard and the other shows that I know not their names. I was weened on TOS in the early to mid 1970’s so I truly believe Mr Roddenberry is rolling in his grave.
If WB really buys Paramount and owns the Star Trek IP, I wonder what that will mean for the eventual possibility of a Babylon 5 Reboot? WB already owns Babylon 5, and they might see it as competing with Star Trek--as it did in the 90s--so they wouldn't want to produce Babylon 5 and Star Trek series at the same time. This would be an interesting topic for an @SciTrek video. Personally, I'd prefer to see a new Babylon 5 series with JMS at the helm over the poorly written Star Trek that has come out under Kutzman. Star Trek Deep Space Nine was the only Star Trek series that ever equaled the quality of writing on Babylon 5, IMHO. And they pulled a lot of their concepts from the Babylon 5 series bible that JMS distributed to studios before DS9 went into production.
erm yes ? , or no ?. about 2 mins in i had got my shoes and socks off and my slide rule wrapped around a toe or 15 and my algebra book had set on fire and my differential equations had jammed up the flux capacitor. and the lawyer was a bit confused by it ? what hope have the rest of us got ? lol. and how many times have you had to type that out and go nope thats not right start again !.
as long as they erase the JJ Abrams versions of the movies and everything that came after the enterprise series I could care less ! JJ Abrams should never have been allowed to touch the Star trek franchise, the guy knows nothing about star trek and said so, he should have stuck with his X men stuff and everything they did after the Enterprise series was a complete atrocity and the exact opposite of everything Gene Roddenberry stood for! it was negative and racist and they tried to push their woke ass agenda! Gene Roddenberry was a very positive man and believed that things were going to be better they only made things worse and were very negative as well as woke, racist and negative! on top of it the way they treated people who were outside creators was despicable and that needs to be changed!
As fast as Paramount is losing $, Redstone's shares will too the longer this goes on. At some point the debt holders will get involved. Lower the price, the more left for new content.
Its not just paramount, its everybody all over the place. not just the US... my guess, most of the tv & movie studio across the world won't survive past 2040.
Paramount Global owns Channel 5 (a dreadful mainstream UK TV broadcast channel) and the free streaming service Pluto TV. . I doubt any deal could make these services worse
Warner last ship to go, Disney, Sony MGM ? Warner Patamount ? Amazone more suitable with series, Stargate now well at MGM ! Warner as a news, not a traditionel movie/TV producer, Selling of Paramount lot a shame for the whole movie industrie, where are big production going except locations ?
Paramount should acquire the Disney via Amazon/Sony, but only if the Harris brothers and national amusements could compromise on the Star Trek Marvel skydance studio then Willam Shatner could combine with the kurtzman alternate timelines of the esoteric order of Dagon and then bring in Khan as a side character for the show as well in the IP via Space 1999 with its assault on Star Wars Battlefront but No Secret Hideout Evar!!!
The thing is that all this wouldn't be happening to these studios if they didn't go down the DEI Woke Road with both their hiring practices and production of product that nobody wanted to see. When studios make product that only they want to see, and not what their loyal fanbase want, then they're gonna bomb. And this goes for gaming companies as well. I mean i can just picture what goes on in these pitch meetings sometimes. It's like, "What total nonsensical woke bullshit can we put in this project that we like, but everyone else is gonna absolutely hate?" Now, not saying that that's what happened at Paramount, bht it sure seems like that's what's going on at Disney, and maybe even at Sony with their Madame Web fiasco. I have a feeling as to what's going on.. It's that ever since Covid, all the old timers retired and have left everything up to the woke Millennials and they've turned everything to shit. I mean what IP has had the most excitement since Covid? I would have to argue that Legendary's Monsterverse has had the greatest culture influence here in the last few years. If Godzilla x Kong does some good numbers, then i can see that franchise only getting stronger. There is literally enough classic material there from the Toho films to translate to this new Monsterverse for decades to come.
From those I know who use streaming services, Paramount is the least liked one. I know some who just tuned in when they offered the free trial time. Without the Star Trek content they would have nothing to offer. If they merge with someone else, it can just benefit them, or is the last chance to stay in this market.
![ไข้ขึ้นเลย! เมื่อแฝดโดนจัดเต็มวัคซีนครบ2เดือน🤒 [cc] แดนแพทตี้ SS2 | EP.54 |](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/z2VHItnyyvY/mqdefault.jpg)
The only good news in that is that they would buy back Star Trek from Secret Hideout. So long Kurtzman.
Methinks they are buying out Secret Hideout and the team that produces NuTrek VFX.
This would free up Abrams and Kurtzman to destroy Stargate, BSG, or B5. What a couple of pariahs.
Cancelling JJ/Kurtzman-trek would be excellent news. Decanonizing it officially would be even better.
@@dramaticwords Indeed!!!
If this had been a couple years ago, I'd be all for WB owning Paramount. But, now that Discovery owns WB, I'm totally against it. Discovery has destroyed every entertainment property they've touched outside of house renovation shows.
They ended Mythbusters they stopped carrying their own shows on discovery+ the wreck it all.
You might want to look into Warner Bros history for the past 30 40 50 60 90 years, they aren't a very good company they treat their talent like shit
Sadly, Disney has been running this playbook with their acquisitions too. Meanwhile, Amazon has their own problems. What a world where Netflix and Apple are the only media companies that seem to have a firm hand on the wheel.
@@harrypothead42024Jack Warner's legacy from the days of the Studio System. He was a real SOB who liked to tie actors up in multi-year contracts, then he would treat them like shyte.
Federation Dream Home, Cardassian Beach Hunters, oooo RISA LIFE... thats a good one, Amazing Romulan Homes... gosh there are so many to choose from 🤣 Oh c'mon that was GOLD! Id stay away from House Hunters Feranginar... its not my style. 🤪
I would love to see a creation of Star Trek Studios or even a generic studio for the production of Space Opera in general that happened to own all of Star Trek.
"Star Studios"
Only if Abrams and Kurtzman aren't allowed to own voting shares, either directly, or indirectly through holding companies, investment companies, etc. Sort of like setting up CC&Rs to the new entity that forbid those two them from having any control in any way for the next 50 years. (The time limit is because perpetual agreements aren't typically legally binding).
@@mjmeans7983 Oh, yes, good point.
@@SteelWolf13 I think there's already a Star Studio. How about Star Hope Studio? That gives the sort of optimistic feel that Trek is supposed to have.
@danjager6200 but Disney could sue, alleging that they took that name from Star Wars: A New Hope. I really like the name, but I'm not sure if it would clear legal.
Paramount did it to themselves they broke themselves because of poor oversight bad management. Spending like drunken Sailors on questionable product. Not understanding or appreciating your customer base putting out schlocky merchandise if at all not knowing how to Market your IPS
crazy to think how much more could have been achieved with so much less, without turning off the built in fan base!
We can only hope whoever gets star trek, they throw out the trash made since discovery and then return to the original continuity.
Warner's owe 50 billion dollars? So Paramount is in worse financial shape? This won't be a merger, this will just be debt consolidation.
It broke my heart when Fox was sold....it was an iconic studio packed with stuff like Alien/Predator...Star Wars used to be there...
Don't forget the Simpsons.
only the original Star Wars. The other 5 were independent films made by Lucasfilm, they were only distributed by Fox under licensing agreements
With the current state Disney is in, they need to sell off 20th Century Fox (now 20th Century Studios) and that unit's library. I heard Lachlan Murdoch is now in charge of both Fox Corp AND News Corp., and he didn’t like it when Rupert Murdoch, his father, sold 20th.
wow, sounds like a big mess going on in the streaming world! I just hope Star Trek remains intact! "Star Trek Studios" is probably not a bad idea, that way you have a team that's in charge of them and owns the IP, and if someone else buys them, fine, but production of Star Trek remains stable. Hopefully that would be for both streaming and movies and TV. 🙂
Yeah, there were already WAY too many media companies controlling everything that comes out of the entertainment industry.
Maybe if people who call themselves sci-fi "fans" actually had curiosity and support for new ideas we could have a thriving popular culture. Instead, it's sad to watch the end times for entertainment lurch forward inexorably.
Great report!
Thank you for this information. As a Paramount "owner", my concern is strictly about the future value of my stock. That value is very much related to the sales negotiations. Recently, Warren Buffet and Berkshire-Hathaway cut their ownership interest in Paramount, so someone must have been buying Paramount shares on the cheap as the price has dropped. Thank God there appear to be interested buyers out there.
Paramount is one of last old school studios left standing. As such, the Paramount name and logo still carry a lot of weight, so any future owner will almost certainly keep the Paramount name.
Here in NY, the WB deal is dead... The market reacted negatively to this deal and it's been dead since it was announced.
Not sure why anyone is talking about this deal.
An excellent and well-explained summary. Very informative.
Paramout are talking about 800 jobs to go...
The problem with Netflix absorbing Max and Paramount, would be anti-trust concerns. It might not pass the US governments sniff test in that department. No one else could realistically compete with that on the same scale.
It will be allowed because they will still be sold as seperate channels.. and a bundle.. if merging into one you’d be right 100%. and the belief is if Disney can buy fox, anything is a go.
@@scitrek They might be offered separately or bundled, but still controlled by the same company. It's akin to having a single cable company, but saying that's ok, because you don't have to buy the package that has all the channels. It's still an anti-trust issue because one entity controls it all or controls enough to make the competition irrelevant.
After the FTC came after Microsoft, I don't see this being approved without big concessions. FTC is foolishly still fighting Microsoft. Microsoft will not buy Paramount despite having Halo on that streaming service.
It was a mistake to put Star Trek behind a paywall. I have a business question. Phil Spencer CEO of Xbox just had a podcast. He said they have to grow or they have to lay people off. Why can't they have a business model that is status quo to keep what they have? Why must companies grow? Why can't a business survive on revenue alone? Is it because they are a publicly traded company? Why can't dividends be good enough? It sounds like a business model to cater to investors that want to buy low and sell high. I'm wildly guessing. How does this all work?
With the lack of studio space,, especially in LA, wouldn't be more profitable/advantageous for WB to spin off the studio space to a different division and lease/rent out the space to other productions? Sure, selling it off would significantly lower their debt, but I'm sure they could make move, even in the short run, by keeping it. Thoughts?
As to a joint venture with Skydance/Allen, I don't think this would bode well for Allen. It is my understanding that CBS still holds the TV rights for ST and Paramount has only limited permission to produce TV of ST (am I wrong?). If the Skydance /Allen thing went through, Skydance, which is successful with movies is good to go, but Allen, who knows TV, would still have to do an agreement with CBS on the TV or outright buy the rights (big money would have to change hands) and he would be out the investment money with Skydance AND a huge chunk with CBS. It seems like a Lose/Lose situation to me
Would be interesting if WB merged with Paramount, transfer the Star Trek IP, and other such franchises to the Paramount name from CBS side, then sell CBS to Byron Allen with the studio space.
If Star Trek were done, like you said buying out secret hideout, merging the Star Trek IP into one studio, and spun off into it's own division. Though I would add they should license it to the fan films, where they could actually earn money as long as Star Trek got their cut.
That would be putting Star Trek in the hands of the fans who would have several different ways to take Star Trek, which I don't think would be great at all.
@@vegeta50024 No. It would mean they could make their fan films, but have to work within a framework.
I expect a split-up sale. Warner wants the IP, but not the studio lot and probably not CBS. Skydance wants the studio lot, but not CBS and probably not most of the IP. Byron Allen wants CBS, but not the studio lot and IP. I am defining wanting the IP as wanting to make new products with it, as they would all be happy with licensing out the back catalog. I suspect they will negotiate with each other to minimize their costs, and make a joint offer where each gets the part they want most.
makes sense...their IPs"" are not viable...noone wants remakes or badly done sequels... everyone is sick of the creative bankruptcy...flop flop flop
Thanks for update.
3:25 💯agree. Every big industry consolidates into 2-4 big players. Super bundles are that exactly. 👏
What a mess! I wonder what Jack Warner the founder of Warner Brothers would think of this. Apparently, this all started when Paramount had big dreams of money pouring in from its streaming services. Now it seems that another iconic name is about to disappear due to management ineptitude & the desire to take advantage of that. I am concerned about how this effects Star Trek but even more importantly the many people who will lose employment through no fault of their own. Those at the top will do Ok but as it is the case with this sort of upheaval those in the mid to lower ranks will be screwed. As if living in California isn't bad enough at the moment. The rushing water is symbolic of not only our screwing up the planet but many the many jobs that are going to be swept away with Paramount's "re-birth."
Star Trek will finish out season three of Strange New Worlds and Discovery will air its last season. After that, those shows should be wrapped up. There's plenty of old shows to last a lifetime even if nothing new is produced again. Star Trek could end gracefully before it just becomes a soap opera. Lots of fans hate the new series like Picard and Discovery and won't watch them.
Do you live in California? Been living here since 1984 and wouldn’t live anywhere else. Came from Missouri which is a dysfunctional hell hole now. I see tons of out of state license plates driving around my town. People come to California for vacations. If California is terrible for someone , they can always leave.
@@bigdougscommentary5719 I was not referring to living in California. I was referring to Paramount's situation which is a mess. Eventually it will be resolved but at the cost of many jobs. Upper management will probably do OK. Regarding living in Missouri, I am more than happy to continue to live in NJ.
@@josephfilm73whoever gets the rights to Star Trek, should lock all the newer shows into a vault, to never see the light of day again.
Then, film new shows that follow the canon.
Consolidation of streaming services is I believe inevitable. There's too many fragmented ones at present and the economics of that can't be very good. As long as there's enough for divers programming and a smaller but competitive environment. And keeping creative teams that work is critical.
I've never trusted Paramount, and I never will. I could never forgive them for the death of my franchise.
Very nicely done
I think having their own Star trek studio, is a good idea, if they can get rid of Klutzman and J.J. who really don't like trek nor have any real appreciation for what they have. However the idea of a dedicated studio and team for trek productions is merely wishful thinking, until Warner Bros. negotiates their way through the financial minefield of the stock holders to finalize the purchase.
How many celebrities and screenwriters are going to be pissed off about this after the writers and actors strike just happened last summer?😒🤷🏽♂️🤦🏾♂️
Thanks Jay!
If Warner gets Paramount, it makes a crossover with the DC multiverse possible . . . maybe the Federation headquarters is on Earth-1701.
The only crossover is WBD and paramount employees on the unemployment line
More proof that Secret Hideout has managed to destroy the Star Trek brand.
I've stuck by my theory that one day, there will be maybe two or one large conglomerate that will oversee all of the archives from major studios and TV companies from around the world. All that will remain is the logos or production houses who financed or made the production. The current shifting sands of companies gradually being merged or sold up certainly will occur as time moves forward. Streaming is still on target to be the dominant media entertainment hub for the global populations. People keep saying that streaming is finished. Well, streaming isn't finished. Streaming was only really born 2019 during the Covid pandemic, and is currently still only an infant. There's still many years of fine tuning and development to achieve.
MGM's roar is still around, though they no longer own their studio space, have nothing to do with the Vegas casinos, sold off most of their memorabilia decades ago and Warner owns all their films before 1986.
It's no fun watching the streaming companies form into a new ultramega cable company. once they congeal into a single mass of IP, I'm sure prices for streaming will go through the roof the way cable did.
As long as Walt Disney and Catherine Kennedy do not get their hands on Paramount, whatever happens is something I will accept. I feel that way because Catherine Kennedy has ruined so many franchises, and just near destroyed the lives and carriers of a many great movie stars.
If Paramount is sold, that would leave Warner Bros, NBC/Universal, Sony Pictures, and Disney as the remaining major studios left. Concentrating media power into fewer companies never turns out better for the public. Just look at the last 15-20 years of movies. Most of them are unoriginal, soulless, factory-made, focus group tested, "safe", and devoid of any real substance and are made for people with 30 second attention spans.
A point about the FCC. They have a say in the approval process. But that only concerns ownership of television production for over the air broadcasts and cable. Streaming is not regulated by the FCC. Streaming, motion picture production and distribution would be regulated by the FTC.
A Hybrid deal could be interesting in some odd ways. Personally I think it's better to keep IP owner ship unified. Just look at the problem Marvel has with Spiderman in the MCU.
This sounds like another repeat of the Time-Warner / Turner Broadcasting deal from the 90s. Warner Bros was equally confused over what to do with Hanna-Barbera Studios and Cartoon Network.
Painful for me to see. I live in Pittsburgh. Westinghouse Broadcasting was close with CBS and in the 90's bought CBS outright. Seeing CBS tossed around is seeing Westinghouse fully forgotten.
After all is said and done, I predict there will be 5 big services left: Netflix (Max, Paramount, and of course Netflix), Disney (Hulu, ESPN, and Disney), Amazon, Peacock,and Apple.
With all the backroom / boardroom wheeling and dealing, it's a wonder that any project gets made at all. Meanwhile all the fans want is for these things to go ahead in some sort of concrete way. Hopefully things will settle out soon.
As it stands, WB won't legally be allowed by FCC to purchase Paramount. Too many segments of WB and Paramount overlap in such as way that FCC would require both entities to spin off or sell holdings to become a non-monopoly business.
Thank you for this very detailed and well-researched explanation of this situation - much appreciated. While WB certainly has a lot of debt, I would expect that they will be able to offer the most cash to Sheri Redstone/National Amusements and so they will be the winners of this. They, in turn, will look to unload stuff they don't want/need, such as excess real estate and CBS. As for our beloved Star Trek, I think that its proven to be very valuable when done correctly (Picard Season 3, for example) so, in any case, I would expect that it will continue as before to a great extent.
Can you do an addendum of the potential effect on The Orville from the pending Paramount sale? After all, The Orville is like a "sister" universe to Star Trek.
The fact that they're posting SO MANY things saying they know we want it but we're not getting it....
It's all PR to press out buttons and drum up the desire before announcing that they've decided to 'listen to fans" and listen to the 'success of Picard" and that they will give us Legacy.
Why else is everyone like Patrick Stewart, DeLancie, Jeri Ryans, and Matalas making so many comments about it. They don't say anything else they're told to.
Highly possibly that wb will buy it and sell cbs/bet to allen and the film studio to skydance and load then with bet and keep the leftovers and ip after a few write downs the old zaslav special. I don't see a reason Netflix would buy wb.
Well, it seems to be the sensible option would be for Skydance to buy Paramount and then sell cbs Byron, Alan
Paramount is Iconic! Very sad if Paramount is broken up.
I think if Paramount is sold there is a good chance the new owners could ignore the sunk cost in shows like Star Trek Discovery and move forward with a clean sheet as if they never happened. they would put a priority on having the IP make money.
Wow. I didn't know that Paramount was up for sale. I expect that there will be more studio sales as the movie industry contracts. Movie theater attendance will continue to decline. Unfortunately, streaming services cannot generate the same revenue of the old business model. Warners would do well in selling off Paramount assets, especially the real estate.
Is Paramount Boldly Going, Going, Gone?🤔
They need to make decent Star Trek and not the Vile JJ/Klutzman Trek🤤💩💩💩 We've been getting since 2009🤔🙄😒
But who would you honestly get to make "decent Star Trek" and what would even be considered decent these days that's not already in limbo in terms of The Orville?
Fan fiction is the future folks.
I'm a bit surprise that Viacom would sell Paramount
I wasn't asked if I wanted to buy paramount. I've got $50 on the table.
Not sure if I want WB to get it.
I don't want disney to get it.
Disney wouldn't be able to get it, as they own ABC, their own named channel, Disney XD, Nat Geo, FX, Fox, among other channels. It would be a monooply & that's why it would be an issue.
Secret hideout needs the boot.
Come on Universal get your hands on D.C. comics & Star Trek attractions in Universal studios
William Shatner should buy it
I'm a little confused, particularly on the type of debt WB has as you say. What legally or financially is stopping one or more of the dozens of institutional investors that own WB from just cranking out the cash needed to slay the purchase, if not assuage some of the debt issues?
Banks and hedge funds don’t usually give customers money for nothing… do you mean in exchange for part ownership?
@@scitrek Well, I guess I am really asking, why wouldn't, say, BlackRock, State Street, or Vanguard make offerings of the cash needed by WB to make the purchase, in exchange for just a larger equity or more shares in WB? Or extend it as a loan? I wonder the same with Disney too: why would an institutional _owner_ of a security *not* capitalize on either a credit-lending opportunity or equity-gaining opportunity...or find some other way to exploit its asset by injecting it with cash?
@@Evangelionism they might. Right now we just don’t know except to say that was not their initial offer.
@@scitrek Okay I see. Time shall tell I suppose
Someone ( as in media companies) has to go. We can't have all these extra services are expect them to live on.
rest in peace Paramount studio 1914-2024
JEBUS WB and Para on the same lot?! Good thing this didn't happen when Pop was alive and working... I would have Never saw him.
I'm a day one fan of Star Trek, all of them. I got into streaming because cable prices got out of control. Then,.some, like Paramount, wanted to start charging to watch, it's just too much like cable, start low then jack the price too high (I still don't know how you pay them) until they intrude into other bills.
I said I wouldn't pay Paramount a dime, but I'm waffling on that, I need my Star Trek.
Sure, it's fiction, imperialistic, and ideal. You can't choose what you fall in love with, not really.
I'm not sure I'm willing to bend over for another cable TV scenario. I wonder what's next after corporate consolidated streaming?
Streaming services are too expensive and too limited, I see the excitement in combining them but it's the new content that is fuelling the market and that is still spread across the industry, hence very little change here.
Having watched hollywood wheeling and deal making and it's aftereffects I can only say Trouble Ahead.
Hollywood is over. To many monopolies going on, Disney being the main one. No one should be allowed to own more than one studios.
Great job! Yeah these streaming services are a mess! CBS is the only real channel I still watch a lot of shows on! Like all the NCIS’s and Blue Bloods! It’s going to be really hard when that show ends!
Don't let Disney come within a light year of this sale.
We have six francizes with confused IP and resulting legal messes. Star trek is split between two or three teams two movie/ TV and one older game IP. Star Wars is in an out right state of civil war. Star Gate is split between two companies that will not work together. They also broke Doctor Who and now the best Dr Who stuff comes from fans outside the BBC. Amazon somehow figured out how to wreck lord of the Rings.
The Pokémon Verses Palworld mess is because the former trained up hundreds of artists two years ago but don't have a project for them since and can't legally do PC games so Pocket Pair, founded by a former junior employee, has snapped up the skilled artists and did the PC game everyone wants. (except Nintendo's handheld device manufacturers.)
It strikes me that someone somewhere is either going to have to innovate greatly and in the process give these guys and gals all good scare. Where's the Orville when you really need it.
The sad truth about Paramount is that they could have done better. They could have made Real Star Trek un Tainted Bad Robot/Secret Hideout Away from Alex Kurtzman. Instead of Terminating Alex, they kept him and let him run amok with Garbage Trek. If Paramount wants the majority of the Fanbase. Terminate Alex Kurtzman and Sever Star Trek from Secret Hideout. And you can begin to get some money back.
What you suggest is opposite of what SciTrek seems to think is the best option that Paramount might have, considering that Secret Hideout controls elements of Star Trek but not the entire IP itself.
I know that your idea would be to cleave off Secret Hideout, but that would mean also getting rid of elements that someone else coming into the IP couldn't use if they wanted to. I get that you don't think those elements that were created are anything but smelly turds, but you don't know what it is that someone else may look at, correct?
@@vegeta50024 just throw out what they control, it's just not worth it. sorry legacy
The idea of Netflix running paramount’s streaming is a very clever idea.
A bit like how (back in the day) some smaller search engines were powered by the biggies.
Just really rebadging the Netflix tech with a paramount front end.
That’s a very clever way to do it. Makes paramount able to have a service but without having to worry about the infrastructure.. just pay Netflix to do it all 😁
Sigh. Maybe if this deal goes through we might see Legacy when Jeri Ryan is in her 80's like Patrick Steward was in Picard.
No WB, don't want the Mirror Universe to become the Trek Prime Timeline.
Bottom line is , if Paramount had made Trek series that fans and people actually wanted to see, they would have made money with them and even more off the merchandise. And then they would not be in trouble. So stupid. So avoidable and yet inevitable in current year mindset.
WBD does not need more studio space? Post pandemic, Disney and Netflix used a lot of WBD Burbank space. What does WBD do? Levels the storied external "The Ranch" space in Burbank for more stages. Yep that's the plan, more stages. Wandavision was shot on the Ranch in front of the Lethal Weapon house. So if Paramount studios was bought by WBD, they would likely sell it to a stage maintenance group or keep it for themselves. Not sell it to someone else to use. Stages are still VERY popular in LA County.
The business model for them is to control studio space and rent it out. There is actually a shortage of studio space.
@@scitrek exactly. So why say WBD would just sell it off?
@@cjplay2 I said they’d sell sections and use sections. But they would need to recoup cash too
@@scitrek okay then. I'm just saying selling the paramount lot when stages are still in dire need and the industry is so fractured (in a good way, IMO) that a full/uncontrolled sale seemed unlikely.
@@cjplay2the way it’s been explained to me is they will keep enough to do what they want.. and sell some to bring in a cash injection. They will need a short term cash injection to off set costs
I saw all the Star Trek movies on the MAX app! What’s up with that?!
These past few years Star Trek shows have really declined. I haven’t watched any Picard and the other shows that I know not their names. I was weened on TOS in the early to mid 1970’s so I truly believe Mr Roddenberry is rolling in his grave.
I WAS ON SEASON 4 OF VOYAGER ON PRIME VIDEO!
Edit:Netflix has it for free, YAAAAAAAAAAAAY
If WB really buys Paramount and owns the Star Trek IP, I wonder what that will mean for the eventual possibility of a Babylon 5 Reboot? WB already owns Babylon 5, and they might see it as competing with Star Trek--as it did in the 90s--so they wouldn't want to produce Babylon 5 and Star Trek series at the same time. This would be an interesting topic for an @SciTrek video. Personally, I'd prefer to see a new Babylon 5 series with JMS at the helm over the poorly written Star Trek that has come out under Kutzman. Star Trek Deep Space Nine was the only Star Trek series that ever equaled the quality of writing on Babylon 5, IMHO. And they pulled a lot of their concepts from the Babylon 5 series bible that JMS distributed to studios before DS9 went into production.
Why doesn't Skydance and Allen get together to make a deal?
Star Trek Studios sounds great.... much like Bad Wolf for Doctor Who
erm yes ? , or no ?.
about 2 mins in i had got my shoes and socks off and my slide rule wrapped around a toe or 15 and my algebra book had set on fire and my differential equations had jammed up the flux capacitor.
and the lawyer was a bit confused by it ? what hope have the rest of us got ? lol.
and how many times have you had to type that out and go nope thats not right start again !.
I'll put in an offer for $5 and a bucket full of hockey pucks. 😉
The future is… DVDs and Blu-Rays…. Get ‘em before they are gone and the only option is a subscription to a stream of garbage.
as long as they erase the JJ Abrams versions of the movies and everything that came after the enterprise series I could care less ! JJ Abrams should never have been allowed to touch the Star trek franchise, the guy knows nothing about star trek and said so, he should have stuck with his X men stuff and everything they did after the Enterprise series was a complete atrocity and the exact opposite of everything Gene Roddenberry stood for! it was negative and racist and they tried to push their woke ass agenda! Gene Roddenberry was a very positive man and believed that things were going to be better they only made things worse and were very negative as well as woke, racist and negative! on top of it the way they treated people who were outside creators was despicable and that needs to be changed!
@aaroncortright9860 ..what are you talking about?
Gene Roddenberry was the most "woke" person in the 1960s.. geeezzz
Given the absolute sh*tshow that is the DCU under WB, I have no doubt that they'd f-up Trek royally.
Paramount Destroyed Star Trek! And Destroyed Itself with It!
Universal Studios isn't just a theme park you know. Paramount and WB are not the only game in town
They haven’t expressed a viable interest yet.
If it follows the MGM and Stargate trend then its going to mean the death of Star Trek
I don't want anything more going to Netflix. I hate that company and won't give them my money
As fast as Paramount is losing $, Redstone's shares will too the longer this goes on. At some point the debt holders will get involved. Lower the price, the more left for new content.
Its not just paramount, its everybody all over the place. not just the US... my guess, most of the tv & movie studio across the world won't survive past 2040.
Paramount Global owns Channel 5 (a dreadful mainstream UK TV broadcast channel) and the free streaming service Pluto TV. . I doubt any deal could make these services worse
Cartoon Network is sure going to get purged
why why WHY cant they MAKE simple little story tha t people will pay god money to SEE
Warner last ship to go, Disney, Sony MGM ? Warner Patamount ? Amazone more suitable with series, Stargate now well at MGM ! Warner as a news, not a traditionel movie/TV producer, Selling of Paramount lot a shame for the whole movie industrie, where are big production going except locations ?
Streaming vs movie and tv licensing
As long as Kurtzman goes as part of the deal. The KK of Star Trek.
Paramount should acquire the Disney via Amazon/Sony, but only if the Harris brothers and national amusements could compromise on the Star Trek Marvel skydance studio then Willam Shatner could combine with the kurtzman alternate timelines of the esoteric order of Dagon and then bring in Khan as a side character for the show as well in the IP via Space 1999 with its assault on Star Wars Battlefront but No Secret Hideout Evar!!!
The thing is that all this wouldn't be happening to these studios if they didn't go down the DEI Woke Road with both their hiring practices and production of product that nobody wanted to see. When studios make product that only they want to see, and not what their loyal fanbase want, then they're gonna bomb. And this goes for gaming companies as well. I mean i can just picture what goes on in these pitch meetings sometimes. It's like, "What total nonsensical woke bullshit can we put in this project that we like, but everyone else is gonna absolutely hate?" Now, not saying that that's what happened at Paramount, bht it sure seems like that's what's going on at Disney, and maybe even at Sony with their Madame Web fiasco. I have a feeling as to what's going on.. It's that ever since Covid, all the old timers retired and have left everything up to the woke Millennials and they've turned everything to shit. I mean what IP has had the most excitement since Covid? I would have to argue that Legendary's Monsterverse has had the greatest culture influence here in the last few years. If Godzilla x Kong does some good numbers, then i can see that franchise only getting stronger. There is literally enough classic material there from the Toho films to translate to this new Monsterverse for decades to come.
From those I know who use streaming services, Paramount is the least liked one. I know some who just tuned in when they offered the free trial time. Without the Star Trek content they would have nothing to offer. If they merge with someone else, it can just benefit them, or is the last chance to stay in this market.