Paramount launches $108bn counter bid for Warner Bros in final act of streaming wars

Listen to This Article

The Skydance-backed offer of $30 a share throws Netflix’s $27.75 deal into disarray, fuelled by foreign sovereign wealth and the Ellison family fortune.

The battle for the soul—and the back catalogue—of Hollywood has entered a chaotic, nuclear phase. Just days after Netflix appeared to have secured the crown jewels of American entertainment, Paramount Skydance on Monday launched a staggering $108.4 billion hostile bid for Warner Bros Discovery, shattering the illusion of a settled deal and plunging the industry into fresh uncertainty.

This eleventh-hour maneuver is not merely a counteroffer; it is a declaration of total war against the streaming hegemony of Netflix. The Silicon Valley giant had seemingly locked down an approx $72 billion equity deal on Friday to acquire Warner’s film studios and the coveted HBO and DC Comics libraries. Paramount’s aggressive retort, a cash-heavy proposal significantly sweetening the pot, signals that the legacy media empires will not go gently into that good night.

The Ellison Empire Strikes Back

The architecture of this hostile takeover is as controversial as it is colossal. Fronted by David Ellison of Skydance, the bid is financially backstopped by his father, Larry Ellison—the world’s second-richest man—and a consortium of foreign capital that is likely to raise hackles in the Beltway.

Critical to the Paramount bid financing is Affinity Partners, the investment firm led by Jared Kushner, son-in-law of US President Donald Trump. The capital stack reportedly includes significant injections from the Saudi and Qatari sovereign wealth funds, alongside L'imad Holding Co of Abu Dhabi. This introduction of Gulf state liquidity into the acquisition of an American cultural monolith like Warner Bros is almost guaranteed to trigger intense scrutiny from the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS).

“We believe our offer will create a stronger Hollywood,” David Ellison asserted in a statement on Monday, framing the consolidation as a necessary bulwark against the algorithmic dominance of Netflix. The pitch to shareholders is blunt: a 139% premium over the undisturbed stock price, dwarfing the cash-and-stock mixture offered by Reed Hastings’ firm.

The Numbers: Cash King vs. Stock Power

The pitch to shareholders is blunt and mathematically seductive. Paramount is offering an all-cash price of $30.00 per share for the entire company. This represents a significant premium over the $27.75 per share implied value of Netflix's offer, which relies on a volatile cocktail of cash and stock.

Furthermore, the structure of the deals differs fundamentally. Netflix’s bid was a "carve-out" that would have stripped the studio and streaming assets while leaving the declining linear TV business behind. Paramount, by contrast, is offering to buy the whole cadaver—cable networks, CNN, and all—arguing that a clean break at $30 a share is safer than trusting the fluctuating stock value of a post-merger Netflix.

Antitrust thunderstorms ahead

While the financial logic of the Paramount-Warner merger might appeal to Wall Street arbitrageurs, the regulatory optics are treacherous. Democratic senators have already fired warning shots regarding the Netflix deal, but a Paramount combination presents a different beast: the fusion of two major cable television operators.

This consolidation would birth a media leviathan controlling a frightening percentage of "what Americans watch on TV," potentially surpassing Disney in market share. Analysts note that while the Paramount offer provides an "easier path" regarding vertical integration—since it keeps the studio and distribution pipes together—it creates a horizontal monopoly nightmare that the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) may find impossible to swallow.

A grim horizon for the consumer

For the average viewer, this boardroom bloodsport signals the definitive end of the "Golden Age of Streaming." Whether Warner Bros Discovery falls to Netflix’s efficiency or Paramount’s sovereign-backed billions, the outcome is identical: fewer platforms, higher subscription fees, and the homogenisation of creative output.

The streaming wars were once about who could produce the best content. In 2025, they have devolved into a game of hungry hippos, where the prize is not artistic excellence, but the sheer accumulation of intellectual property rights. As the jockeying for the Iron Throne of media continues, one thing is certain: the conclusion will not be swift, and it will not be cheap.