 |
|
|
|||||
Warner Bros. is telling shareholders of the company that it believes a $72 billion buyout offer from Netflix is superior, and to reject a hostile takeover bid from Paramount Skydance. Paramount went hostile with its bid last week, asking shareholders to reject the deal with Netflix favored by the board of Warner Bros. Paramount is offering $30 per Warner share, or $77.9 billion, to Netflixs $27.75 per share. A Warner Bros. merger with either company would alter the landscape in Hollywood and will face intense scrutiny from U.S. regulators as it would impact movie making, consumer streaming platforms, and, in Paramounts case, a major source of news for millions of people. The competing offers set the stage for combining some of the most beloved entertainment properties. Netflixs vast library includes Stranger Things and Squid Game,” while the much smaller Paramount owns its Hollywood studio and major TV networks like CBS and MTV. Both covet Warner, which owns Warner Bros. Pictures, HBO, and the Harry Potter franchise. “Whichever media company, if any, ultimately secures (Warner), controls the calculus of the streaming wars and so much more, said Mike Proulx, vice president and research director at research firm Forrester. Both offers will face regulatory scrutiny, an issue President Donald Trump has already weighed in on. Here’s what to know about the three players and what the bids mean for the entertainment industry. A look at the offers CEO David Zaslav has been seeking offers for Warner Bros. Discovery since at least October, when he said the company might be open to selling all or parts of its business. Paramount said Monday it had submitted six proposals to Warner over a 12 week period before its offer was rejected in favor of Netflix. So Paramount decided to go straight to Warner shareholders with a bid it says is worth about $79.9 billion, or $30 per share in cash. Paramount, unlike Netflix, is also offering to buy the cable assets of Warner, and asking shareholders of the company to reject the Netflix bid. Paramount CEO Larry Ellison said the offer is worth about $18 billion more in cash than the competing cash-and-stock bid from Netflix. The Paramount deal includes help from investors such as Trumps son-in-law Jared Kushner and funds controlled by the governments of Saudi Arabia and Qatar, according to a regulatory filing. Netflix is offering a combination of cash and stock valued at $27.75 per Warner share. Its offer values Warner at $72 billion, excluding debt, but it is not bidding on Warner-owned networks such as CNN and Discovery. Before Paramount’s bid, the Netflix deal was expected to close in the next 12 to 18 months, after Warner completes its previously announced separation of its cable operations. Competing bids make an eventual deal more likely Matthew Dolgin, senior equity analyst at research firm Morningstar, said there are still many unknowns, including whether Netflix will now sweeten its bid. But, he said, a competing offer makes it more likely that Warner will eventually be acquired. With Paramount now also being involved formally with an offer to shareholders, its even more likely to us that Warner gets acquired, because its no longer a single decision that may or may not hinge on regulatory approval, he said. Shareholders have until Jan. 8, 2026, to vote on Paramounts tender offer. Donald Trump weighed in earlier Another wild card could be President Trump. He already weighed in on the deal, saying that the Netflix offer to buy Warner could be a problem because of the size of the potential size of the audience. The Republican president said he will be involved in the decision about whether the federal government should approve the deal. Paramount’s CEO is the son of Oracle founder Larry Ellison, an ally of Trump. Federal regulators under Trump approved Paramounts $8 billion merger with Skydance in July. Regulatory scrutiny awaits either deal On the Netflix offer, state or federal regulators could be most concerned about the massive size of a combined Netflix and Warner subscription service, said Morningstar’s Dolgin. Netflix is already the worlds largest streaming service. That’s less of a concern with the Paramount deal, because its streaming service is smaller and has as smaller international footprint than Netflix. But regulators may raise red flags over the combination of the Paramount and Warner film and television studios, because relatively few of those remain, Dolgin said. A pattern of media acquisitions As streaming platforms have matured, more media companies are seeking growth through acquisitions. Warner Bros. Discovery itself was created in 2022 when U.S. telecom giant AT&T Inc. spun off and then combined its WarnerMedia operations with Discovery Inc. In 2021, Amazon said it would buy MGM, the movie and TV studio behind James Bond, Legally Blonde and Shark Tank.” Disney bought Fox’s entertainment service in 2019. Technology always faces this pattern of startups, lots of different players, legacy companies getting in on the action, and then ultimately lots of consolidation, said Forrester’s Proulx. And this is the state that were in right now in the streamng wars saga, and in 2026 well see continued consolidation. Mae Anderson, AP business writer
Category:
E-Commerce
China is exploiting partnerships with U.S. researchers funded by the Department of Energy to provide the Chinese military with access to sensitive nuclear technology and other innovations with economic and national security applications, according to a congressional report published Wednesday. The authors of the report say the U.S. must do more to protect high-tech research and ensure that the results of taxpayer-funded work don’t end up benefiting Beijing. They recommended several changes to better protect scientific research in the U.S., including new policies for the Department of Energy to use when deciding whether to fund work that involves Chinese partnerships. The investigation is part of a congressional push to raise a firewall blocking U.S. research from boosting China’s military buildup when the two countries are locked in a tech and arms rivalry that will shape the future global order. Investigators from the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party and the House Committee on Education and the Workforce identified more than 4,300 academic papers published between June 2023 and June of this year that involved collaborations between DOE-funded scientists and Chinese researchers. About half of the papers involved Chinese researchers affiliated with China’s military or industrial base. Particularly concerning, investigators found that federal funds went to research collaborations with Chinese state-owned laboratories and universities that work directly for Chinas military, including some listed in a Pentagon database of Chinese military companies with operations in the U.S. The report also detailed collaborations between U.S. researchers and groups blamed for cyberattacks as well as human rights abuses in China. The Energy Department routinely funds advanced research into nuclear energy and the development and disposal of nuclear weaponry, along with a long list of other high-tech fields like quantum computing, materials science and physics. It doles out hundreds of millions of dollars each year for research. The department oversees 17 national laboratories that have led the development in many technologies. The report followed a number of congressional investigations into federally funded research involving Chinese scientists and researchers. Last year, a report released by Republicans found that partnerships between U.S. and Chinese universities over the past decade had allowed hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding to help Beijing develop critical technology that could help strengthen its military. Another investigation this year revealed that the Pentagon in a recent two-year period funded hundreds of projects in collaboration with Chinese entities linked to China’s defense industry. The Energy Department has failed for decades to take steps to ensure the research it funds doesn’t benefit China, the report’s authors found. They made several recommendations to tighten the rules, including a new standardized approach to assessing the national security risks of research, as well as requirements that the department share information about research ties with China with other U.S. government agencies to make it easier to spot problems. These longstanding policy failures and inaction have left taxpayer-funded research vulnerable to exploitation by Chinas defense research and industrial base and state-directed technology transfer activities, the authors concluded. The Department of Energy did not immediately respond to questions about the report and its recommendations. A message seeking comment was left with the Chinese Embassy in Washington. Rep. John Moolenaar, a Michigan Republican who chairs the select committee, said in a statement that the investigation reveals a deeply alarming problem: The Department of Energy failed to ensure the security of its research and it put American taxpayers on the hook for funding the military rise of our nations foremost adversary. Moolenaar this year introduced legislation aimed at preventing research funding in science and technology and defense from going to collaborations or partnerships with foreign adversary-controlled entities that pose a national security risk. The legislation cleared the House but failed to advance to become part of the annual sweeping defense policy bill. It was met with strong opposition from scientists and researchers, who argued that the measures were too broad and could chill collaboration and undermine America’s competitive edge in science and technology. In an October letter, a group of more than 750 faculty members and senior staffers from American universities told congressional leaders overseeing the armed services that the U.S. is in a global competition for talent. They called for very careful and targeted measures for risk management” to address security concerns. David Klepper and Didi Tang, Associated Press
Category:
E-Commerce
A private equity firm owned by President Donald Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, is no longer backing Paramount’s hostile acquisition bid for Warner Bros. Discovery, the firm confirmed Tuesday.Days after Warner agreed to be bought by Netflix in early December, Paramount launched a rival bid that seeks to bypass Warner’s management and appeal directly to its shareholders with more money. Paramount is offering $30 per Warner share to Netflix’s $27.75.Warner, one of the “big five” Hollywood studios, owns Warner Bros. Pictures, HBO, the DC Comics universe and the Harry Potter franchise. Experts say its acquisition could supercharge the winning company and reshape the streaming wars, either by catapulting Netflix further ahead of top competitors or by cementing a new power player in Paramount.Paramount, which is significantly smaller than Netflix, said its decision to circumvent Warner’s top managers came after they “never engaged meaningfully” with several earlier offers by the company.Paramount made the details of its new offer public and gave Warner shareholders an option to tender their shares selling them directly at a set price in support of its bid. The company is offering to buy Warner’s entire portfolio, including cable networks like CNN that Netflix excluded from its bid.In its appeal to shareholders, Paramount argued its offer may be more likely to pass regulatory scrutiny from the Trump administration.The president has said the Warner and Netflix deal “could be a problem” due to the size of the combined market share.Kushner’s decision to pull his firm’s financial backing takes away a possible Paramount advantage to win over Trump. The amount Kushner’s Affinity Partners was contributing to the offer was not disclosed in Paramount’s latest SEC filings.“With two strong competitors vying to secure the future of this unique American asset, Affinity has decided no longer to pursue the opportunity,” the firm said in a statement. “The dynamics of the investment have changed significantly since we initially became involved in October. We continue to believe there is a strong strategic rationale for Paramount’s offer.”Paramount’s bid is still backed by wealth funds run by three governments in the Persian Gulf, widely reported as Saudi Arabia, Abu Dhabi and Qatar.Paramount, which owns which owns CBS, MTV and the streaming service Paramount+, is newly headed by David Ellison, the son of a major Trump donor. But Trump has recently criticized the Ellisons for his treatment by CBS News’ “60 Minutes.”“If they are friends, I’d hate to see my enemies!” Trump said Tuesday on Truth Social.Warner is reviewing Paramount’s offer and is expected to tell shareholders soon whether it’s a better deal than selling to Netflix. Hannah Schoenbaum, Associated Press
Category:
E-Commerce
Want to know how much you spent on Uber Eats this past year? If the answer is no, bad luck. Just days after Saturday Night Live dropped a satirical skit about an “Uber Eats wrapped,” Uber brought the feature to life with a year-end recap. Around this time each year, platforms from Spotify to YouTube start rolling out personalized recaps, breaking down how users spent their time over the past 12 months. The next logical step? A full accounting of every Uber trip taken and every guilt-ridden Uber Eats order placed this year. On Monday, the company launched its new year-in-review feature called YOUBER, which compiles users activity across both Uber and Uber Eats. The recap shows where you went, how often you splurged on Uber Comfort, and just how frequently you returned to the same takeout spot. If you rank in the top 1% of a restaurants customers, YOUBER will let you know, whether or not that realization fills you with pride or shame. In the SNL sketch, one character learns hes eaten more chicken nuggets than 99% of users worldwide. Another is assigned an Uber Eats agea riff on Spotifys listening ageonly to be told his is Dead. Better than mine, his wife replies. 52 and fat. The parody recap also shows users the compromising and unflattering ways they appeared to the delivery driver while grabbing their food from their doorway. Finally, the app shows personalized messages from customers most frequented restaurants, and calculates the total spent on deliveriesin this case, $24,000. Ubers real version is slightly less brutal. The YOUBER featurecurrently available only in the U.S.can be accessed via a banner in the app and presents users with a card of their stats. That includes total rides, top order, most-used ride type, Uber rating, and one of 14 assigned Uber Personality Profiles, such as Do-Gooder for Uber Electric loyalists, Rise & Shiner for early-morning riders, or Delivery Darling for users who live for deliveries of all kinds. Of course, all shareable on social media if youre brave enough. Alongside individual recaps, Uber also shared global highlights from its 2025 data. The longest ride of the year stretched nearly 700 miles from Austin, Texas, to Pensacola, Florida, taking around 11 hours. Meanwhile, Uber Eats largest order of the year was a Chinese food delivery containing more than 180 items.
Category:
E-Commerce
The proposed $85 billion merger of Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern railroads has lost the support of two unions that represent more than half their workers over concerns it will jeopardize safety and jobs, raise shipping rates and consumer prices, and cause significant disruptions. The Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen and the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes Division are among the most prominent critics of the deal to create the nation’s first transcontinental railroad. When they officially announce their decision Wednesday, they will join the American Chemistry Council, an assortment of agricultural groups, and competing railroad BNSF in raising concerns the merger would hurt competition. The deal has the support of the nation’s largest rail union, which represents conductors and hundreds of individual shippers, and President Donald Trump has said the deal sounds good to him. The U.S. Surface Transportation Board will weigh the opinions of all stakeholders to determine whether the merger is in the public interest once the railroads file their formal application, which is expected later this week. Union Pacific CEO Jim Vena has argued that creating a railroad that stretches from coast to coast would be good for the economy because without the need for a hand-off between railroads in the middle of the country rail shipments would move faster, meaning it could better compete against trucking. But after months of meetings with Vena and other executives, the presidents of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen and the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes Division unionsboth affiliated with the Teamsterssaid they have serious doubts about the potential benefits, and warned the promises Vena made to preserve jobs aren’t detailed enough to be reliable. The unions say there’s nothing to keep the companies from transferring jobs hundreds of miles away or to prevent the sale of some UP lines to short-line railroads that pay less. Union Pacific said in a statement that every employee with a union job at the time of the merger will continue to have one. Weve formalized this jobs-for-life agreement with five unions. Vena has acknowledged that the number of employees at the combined railroad could still shrink through attrition, if workers leave on their own. Rail unions worry about safety and shippers This proposed monopoly will end up costing businesses more and those costs will be passed on to consumers, Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen National President Mark Wallace said. “We believe this transcontinental railroad will make shipping by rail less attractive as the merged carrier passes off rail lines that serve small towns, factories and farms to short line railroads while running miles-long slow-moving trains on the main line. For rail customers it will be a choice between Hell or the highway.’ The unions say they are worried that safety could deteriorate after a merger, because Union Pacific hasn’t made the same improvements Norfolk Southern has in the two and a half years since the disastrous derailment in East Palestine, Ohio. Vena and Norfolk Southern CEO Mark George have said they are optimistic the merger will be approved because they believe it will be good for the country, their customers and rail workers. Shareholders of both railroads overwhelmingly support it. Deal faces stringent review The Surface Transportation Board will review the deal under a tough new standard it adopted in 2001 after a series of disastrous rail mergers in the 1990s that led to shipment delays of weeks or even months. These untested rules require any merger of the six largest railroads to be in the public interest and show that it will enhance competition. When the Surface Transportation Board approved the first major rail merger in more than two decades two years ago, it used a less stringent standard allowing Canadian Pacific’s $31 billion acquisition of Kansas City Southern. Transportation expert and DePaul University Professor Joe Schwieterman said many people have questioned the Union Pacific merger because of its scope and the likelihood that it could trigger another merger, resulting in only two American railroads. Everyone will examine the merger application closely, Schwieterman said. Currently, Norfolk Southern and CSX serve the eastern U.S. while Union Pacific and BNSF serve the west, and the two major Canadian rails compete where they can with their tracks crossing Canada and extending into the United States and Mexico. A merged Union Pacific would likely control more than 40% of the nations freight. This merger is like nothing weve seen before. Its creating a railroad of such enormous scope that its somewhat of a paradigm shift, Schwieterman said. Competitors question the benefits BNSF’s Chief of Staff Zak Andersen said his railroad, which is owned by Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway, is convinced this merger would be bad for competition and lead to higher rates and fewer options for shippers. No customer is asking for this. This is strictly a Wall Street play for shareholders, Andersen said. Earlier this fall, Buffett and CPKC’s CEO both said they weren’t interested in any kind of rail merger right now. Instead, they believe the railroads should continue to find ways to cooperate to deliver shipments more quickly, which can be done without all the complications of a merger. Still, CSX decided to replace its CEO this fall with an executive who has a background leading companies through major mergers. Josh Funk, AP transportation writer
Category:
E-Commerce
Sites : [41] [42] [43] [44] [45] [46] [47] [48] [49] [50] [51] [52] [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] next »