Tech scion David Ellison for months projected confidence that his blockbuster Hollywood merger was on a glide path to completion.
His media company Paramount Skydance’s pitch early this year was that its proposed $111-billion acquisition of rival Warner Bros. Discovery could easily clear regulatory hurdles — unlike Netflix’s competing bid.
Ellison has heavyweights in his corner: His billionaire father Larry Ellison, co-founder of software giant Oracle, is bankrolling the deal, and President Donald Trump is eager for the Ellison family to own CNN and other Warner assets, including HBO and the Burbank film and TV studios behind “Batman,” Harry Potter, Wile E. Coyote, and “The Pitt.”
“We could technically close (the deal) tomorrow,” Ellison told business new channel CNBC during a March interview. “There is nothing in this transaction that trips anything that would create cause for concern.”
But Paramount made a dramatic retreat Friday after two weeks of legal setbacks. The company had been aiming to close the deal by September but agreed to table its takeover — perhaps until next spring — to allow a fiercer than expected challenge from California Attorney General Rob Bonta and 11 other Democratic state attorneys general to advance to trial before an Oakland-based federal judge.
The state prosecutors allege Paramount’s proposed merger with Warner Bros. violates a century-old antitrust law by giving the combined company too much heft in theatrical movie distribution and cable television. Paramount disputes that view.
The delay could saddle Paramount, the smallest of the major media companies, with substantial legal fees and hundreds of millions of dollars in added deal costs. In February, Paramount offered Warner investors a sweetener, so-called “ticking fees,” to win the auction.
Those fees, which begin accruing in October, will cost Paramount an extra $7 million a day — until the purchase is finalized. And if Paramount fails to close the merger, it would owe Warner Bros. Discovery a $7-billion breakup fee.
“Anyone who thinks they know how this deal ends should think again,” Forrester research director Mike Proulx said in a statement. “This deal may still close or it may not. ... The path to either outcome just got longer, messier, and likely more expensive.”
Paramount now must strengthen its case for a high-stakes trial while fortifying Paramount’s existing businesses and managing uncertainty among the employee base. It also must hold together a coalition of financiers, which includes the royal families of Saudi Arabia, Abu Dhabi and Qatar, which jointly agreed to contribute $24 billion for equity stakes in the combined company.
Paramount reversed course after U.S. District Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín dealt the company a blow on Monday when she temporarily blocked Paramount from finalizing the acquisition until mid-August. Looming was a key Aug. 3 hearing for the judge to determine whether the moratorium should be extended. Paramount was concerned the judge would block the deal for the foreseeable future. “They saw the writing on the wall,” Bonta said in an interview.
Columbia Law School business professor Eric Talley added: “This doesn’t constitute Paramount Skydance coming out and waving a big white flag — but it is a small white flag of surrender.” Paramount, in a statement, said heading straight to trial would prove advantageous.
“This is the fastest and clearest way to prove that this transaction is good for competition, good for consumers, and good for creators,” Paramount said. “We look forward to proving our case at trial.”
Last week, the Writers Guild of America separately filed a lawsuit seeking to stop the merger, alleging that writers would encounter less work and lower pay should Paramount buy Warner Bros. Now the merger won’t close until after a resolution in the litigation or by June 1, 2027, whichever date comes first.
Tribune News Service