It’s been just a day since Netflix announced an $82.7 billion deal to buy Warner Bros., and the acquisition has already been called “a ‘full-blown panic mode’ sending Hollywood into,” “possibly a death blow to theatrical film making,” and maybe even the “end of Hollywood.” Some of the firmest resistance has come from the Writers Guild of America, which said in a statement, “This merger must be blocked.”
“The world’s largest streaming company selecting one of the world’s biggest studios, swallowing its competition and effectively making it impossible for anyone else to compete is just the kind of anticompetitive behavior that the antitrust laws were designed to prevent,” WGA said.
“The result would be significant job losses, lower wages for workers throughout the industry, and for everyone, ‘residuals’ producing and selling quality content raises prices, fewer choices available to consumers , and a weakened interactive experience across radio, television theatrically released movies direct to home streaming and more,” Adonis Hoffman, chairman of Business in the Public Interest added.
If other Hollywood unions’ statements were not quite as blunt, they too indicated there are “many serious questions” to be asked of the acquisition’s “impact on the future of the entertainment industry” (in the words of SAG-AFTRA, which represents actors).
The deal followed a competitive process in which Paramount and Comcast also made offers. Paramount sought to acquire the entire company. At the same time, Netflix would take only the film and television studios, along with the streaming business, after Warner Bros., when a plan to spin off its TV networks division was put in motion.
Paramount was initially considered the likely buyer, and its ties to the Trump administration (the studio is now run by David Ellison, son of Oracle co-founder and Trump ally Larry Ellison) helped smooth regulatory approval. And even before the Netflix deal was announced, Paramount’s lawyers sent an angry letter complaining of “a tilted and unfair process,” and details soon emerged that made Netflix the clear winner in public.
The deal is likely to take until the third quarter of 2026 to close and would presumably be subject to extensive regulatory review, not just by Trump’s appointees. Senator Elizabeth Warren — a Massachusetts Democrat who has long railed against Big Tech — issued her own statement calling the deal an “anti-monopoly horror story.”
“A Netflix-Warner Bros. [merger] would create one behemoth of a media company, controlling almost half the entire streaming market — and it’s likely to mean higher prices, fewer choices for consumers, and less innovation,” Warren said.
She also said that antitrust enforcement — and the review process for this deal in particular — should be carried out “fairly and transparently” rather than serve as a tool “to invite influence-peddling and bribery.”
Should the government ultimately prevent the acquisition, Netflix would have to pay a $5.8 billion breakup fee. It is unclear whether Warner Bros. would later continue as a stand-alone company or re-evaluate prior acquisition bids.
Outlining the financial details of the transaction was a focus of the questions posed during an analyst call on Friday morning, during which Netflix explained the deal. Still, executives there also sought to address broader concerns.
For instance, co-CEO Ted Sarandos has said he’s “highly confident in the regulatory process.”
“This deal is pro-consumer, pro-innovation, pro-worker, it’s pro-creator, it’s pro-growth,” he said. “And our plans here are we’re going to be working very closely with all the appropriate governments and regulators, but very confident that we’ll get all the approvals that we need.”
Sarandos also mentioned that Netflix plans to allow HBO to “continue running very much as it has been.” And while it’s not something Netflix has done before, Warner Bros. would continue to produce TV shows for other networks and streaming services, he said: “We want to have that successful business running.”
As for how HBO and HBO Max will be packaged (or included) into the Netflix app, co-CEO Greg Peters said it is too early to discuss details on that front. Still, he added, “We’re very interested in watching how things develop over time as they begin to offer things.” One thing, however, that doesn’t need a viewing of tea leaves is that Netflix thinks “the brand [HBO] is powerful for consumers. We believe that the offering could and should be a part of our plans, and how we structure those for consumers.”
Alongside the usual angst about consolidation, one of the significant questions is how much Netflix (and its deep pockets) will prioritize theatrical releases for combined entity’s films — especially with Warner Bros. had a record-breaking run at the box office this year, while Netflix’s theatrical releases are only in theaters for two weeks and bypass major theater chains due to the short exclusivity window. (This was said to have been the clincher when the “Stranger Things” creators, the Duffer Brothers, inked their exclusive pact with Paramount.)
For his part, Sarandos said he “wouldn’t look at this as a change in strategy for Netflix movies or for Warner movies for that matter” and pointed out that the streaming company has released 30 movies in theaters just this year (though again, usually on fewer screens and for only a short period of time).
Likewise, “everything that’s planned on going theatrically through Warner Bros. will continue going to the theaters through Warner Bros,” he said. But over the long term, he said, “the windows are going to change,” so movies will reach streaming services faster.
“My pushback has been mainly in the realm of the long exclusive windows, which we don’t really think of as consumer-friendly,” he said.
