I host Ankler Agenda and reported on the growing legal challenges to the Paramount-WB merger. I wrote about brands funding scripted series, veterans’ layoff survival tips and microdramas’ impact on production. My Sellers’ Guide covered shows Apple TV to Netflix are buying.
“We’re not going to have oligarchs or kings in the economy.”
That’s California Attorney General Rob Bonta, speaking to me Friday after Paramount agreed to put its $111 billion Warner Bros. Discovery merger on ice until the antitrust lawsuits against it are resolved — or until June 2027, whichever comes first.
Bonta, who is leading the coalition of 12 state attorneys general trying to block the deal, called the delay “a tremendous development in our case and the achievement of something that we’ve been asking for since the start, to give the court sufficient time to review our case without the threat of the companies merging” — the functional equivalent of the preliminary injunction his side had sought. Paramount, remarkably, is calling it a win, too: The company says the outcome is “exactly what we have sought from the outset: a direct path to a trial based on the evidence,” and that “we look forward to proving our case at trial.”
But that path comes with a staggering price tag. Beginning Oct. 1, Paramount owes WBD shareholders roughly $650 million for every quarter the deal remains unclosed — nearly $2 billion if the case stretches through June. And yet there is a scenario in which going straight to trial, and perhaps even losing quickly, could be Paramount’s best chance of ultimately completing the merger.
Both Paramount Skydance and Bonta are calling this move a win.
For today, I spoke to Bonta and a former federal antitrust attorney about what happens next. I also gathered intel from insiders and people doing business with Paramount and WBD about how the delay is landing inside both companies — and whether it changes anything in Hollywood’s day-to-day dealings with them.
Below I have Bonta’s full interview and what’s at stake:
- Bonta’s tough stance on the judge’s ruling, structural remedies and why “we’re not talking settlement”
- Why the judge rejected Paramount’s Netflix-and-Apple argument
- Why Paramount may prefer a full trial — even after effectively conceding the injunction fight
- How a quick loss could accelerate Paramount’s path to appeal
- How WBD insiders took Friday’s news, and what they and agents say will — or won’t — change in day-to-day business
- What comes next, step by step, and why the delay could cost Paramount nearly $2 billion by June
Don’t stop here
Get the rest of this story — and the scoops and intelligence Hollywood reads first.
Already a subscriber?
