#acquisition

Where in the strategy of the Lexmark acquisition was there the action to railroad Xerox completely. Xerox is far from perfect (and Lexmark is far from perfect as well. They did lose £600M last year) BUT Xerox does have a heritage, does know some stuff and has done some good stuff and yet Lex are railroading every decision - ignoring Xerox people, no regard for any Xerox experience and ignoring everything that has ever been done. Why don’t the EC just pay off Xerox people and leave the apparently-Lexmark-wonders to manage it all?

Billionaire Darwin Deason The Man Who Sold ACS To Xerox for $6.4 Billion in 2010 Passes Away at 85. (Xerox's Largest Chairholder)

Heard a rumor this week. Curious if anyone has heard anything about Humana being sold?

How much did we lose on that deal?

Any updates on Shell buying LLOG, what will happen to the people working offshore on the platform?

Warner Bros Discovery has urged shareholders to reject a $108.4bn hostile takeover offer from Paramount Skydance, branding it “inadequate” amid an extraordinary corporate battle to control the legacy media conglomerate.

In a blunt letter to shareholders on Wednesday morning, WBD accused Paramount of having “consistently misled” investors by claiming its bid has a “full backstop” – a safety net to ensure it has sufficient funds – from the Ellisons.

Paramount did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

“Following a careful evaluation of Paramount’s recently launched tender offer, the Board concluded that the offer’s value is inadequate, with significant risks and costs imposed on our shareholders,” Samuel A Di Piazza Jr, chairman of WBD’s board, said in a statement. “This offer once again fails to address key concerns that we have consistently communicated to Paramount throughout our extensive engagement and review of their six previous proposals.

“We are confident that our merger with Netflix represents superior, more certain value for our shareholders and we look forward to delivering on the compelling benefits of our combination.”

Source: The Guardian

Yes, Verizon is in the process of acquiring Frontier Communications in a major $20 billion deal announced in September 2024, with the goal of integrating Frontier's significant fiber network to expand Verizon's broadband offerings nationwide, and the acquisition has received regulatory approval (like from the FCC and state PUCs) with an expected closing by early next month. This acquisition combines Frontier's pure-play fiber assets with Verizon's wireless and existing fiber (Fios) services, aiming to create a stronger, combined broadband and mobile provider.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/irobot-co-founder-says-ftcs-opposition-amazon-deal-wrong-minded-following-bankruptcy-filing

The bankruptcy filing follows the termination of iRobot's proposed $1.4 billion acquisition by Amazon, which was abandoned in January 2024 amid a probe by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) – led by Lina Khan – and European regulators. The FTC's antitrust investigation was focused on Amazon's ability to favor its own products over its rivals.

iRobot co-founder and former CEO Colin Angle told FOX Business in an interview that the FTC's decision to oppose the merger struck him as "wrong-minded" and harmful in retrospect.

"I bet if you asked almost anyone prior to the blocking of the deal with iRobot: Would you rather see iRobot innovating like crazy, coming out with new and better robots for your home, or would you like to see it file for Chapter 11 in the process of being sold to a Chinese manufacturer?" he said. "The wrong thing probably happened."

Layoffs have been announced in the next few months.

The question on everyones lips, might this really happen.Stock up 15pc since rumour was leaked.Is there something in the speculation??? Does Peter want out???

“The acquisition of Armis marks a clear entry by ServiceNow into cybersecurity”

https://www.calcalistech.com/ctechnews/article/qagxm0z4y

So we buy WB, for $80b, sell for $40b, then watch a bidding war for it as it gets resold? Thats what you people call a genius leader. Board won’t do anything cause it’s filled with other flunkies who weren’t popular with the worker bees. If you have to tell me how great you are….you’re probably not very good at what you do.

Netflix and the Hollywood End Game
Monday, December 8, 2025

Warner Bros. started with distribution. Just after the turn of the twentieth century, Harry, Albert, Sam, and Jack Warner bought a second hand projector and began showing short films in mining towns across Ohio and Pennsylvania. In 1907 they purchased their first permanent theater in New Castle, Pennsylvania. Around the same time, they began distributing films to other theaters, and by 1908 they were producing their own movies in California. In 1923 the brothers formally incorporated as Warner Bros. Pictures, Inc., becoming one of the five major Hollywood studios.

What the brothers realized early on was that distribution was not a particularly good business. You had to maintain the theater, source films to show, and your profit was capped by seating capacity, which you had to work constantly to fill. Every empty seat represented revenue lost forever. Producing films, on the other hand, was far more lucrative. A movie could be made once and monetized repeatedly.

In this sense, Hollywood was the tech industry before there was a tech industry. Studios invested heavily upfront in assets that could be leveraged again and again. While Warner Bros. and its peers did at times own large theater chains as part of vertically integrated businesses, the 1948 Paramount decrees forced a breakup. The theaters were spun out because content creation was simply the better business.

That business improved over time. Television created expansive new licensing opportunities for films and later TV shows. Homes had more televisions than cities had theaters, and access was constant. Home video added another window, allowing movies to generate revenue through rentals and sales. The largest windfall came from the cable bundle, where roughly 90 percent of households paid increasing monthly fees for access to vast amounts of content they mostly did not watch. Hollywood revenue became a de facto annuity.

Internet Distribution and Aggregation

Netflix, founded in 1997, also began with distribution, specifically DVDs by mail. Its streaming service launched in 2007, exactly 100 years after the Warner brothers bought their first theater. The differences were fundamental. Internet distribution meant Netflix was available everywhere, with no physical infrastructure to maintain. Every additional customer carried near zero marginal cost, and the potential market was theoretically the entire world.

Over time, Netflix, like Warner Bros. before it, backward integrated into content production. Unlike traditional studios, however, Netflix’s content production has always existed solely to serve its distribution. Netflix understood something Hollywood was slow to grasp. On the Internet, distribution is even more scalable than content.

This is not immediately obvious. Content is scarce and exclusive, while Internet access is universal. Yet universal access creates an abundance of content far beyond what anyone can consume. This shifts power to Aggregators that organize content on behalf of users, delivering a satisfying experience. Consumers flock to the Aggregator, suppliers follow, content increases, and the cycle reinforces itself. Over time, the largest Aggregators gain overwhelming advantages in customer acquisition and churn reduction. That is the true source of their economic power.

Hollywood studios learned this lesson painfully over the past decade. As Netflix grew and commanded a superior stock multiple despite producing what many considered inferior content, studios believed they could win by leveraging their content libraries. Content was king in a world constrained by physical distribution. On the Internet, customer acquisition and retention in a world of infinite alternatives matter more. That was Netflix’s advantage, and it has only grown.

## Netflix Buys Warner Bros.

On Friday, Netflix announced it would acquire Warner Bros. for $72 billion. The deal follows Warner Bros. Discovery’s plan to split its studios and HBO Max from its cable networks. The transaction values Warner Discovery shares at $27.75, with an enterprise value of approximately $82.7 billion.

Paramount had submitted a $30 per share all cash bid for the entire Warner Bros. Discovery business, including cable networks. Netflix, by contrast, is acquiring only the Warner Bros. studio assets. Reports suggest the remaining business is being valued at roughly $5 per share, implying Netflix effectively outbid Paramount.

It is also worth noting the asymmetry in resources. Paramount’s bid would not have been supported by its operating business, which is valued around $14 billion, but by the personal wealth of David Ellison’s family. Netflix, meanwhile, is valued at approximately $425 billion and generated $9 billion in cash flow over the past year. This was not a fair fight.

This outcome aligns with a scenario outlined in 2016, where Netflix was positioned not as another cable channel, but as a dominant Aggregator with power over suppliers. Netflix’s superior viewing experience drove user acquisition. Its user base attracted suppliers, which improved its offerings, which attracted more users. In the most optimistic outcome, Netflix would become the only TV service consumers need.

One obvious path would have been Netflix becoming the primary buyer for Hollywood suppliers, as seen in its relationship with Sony. However, several developments may have pushed Netflix toward outright ownership.

In 2019, Netflix launched Formula 1: Drive to Survive. The show dramatically increased the value of Formula 1 media rights, yet Netflix captured none of that upside. In 2023, NBCUniversal licensed Suits to Netflix, turning a dormant library show into a streaming phenomenon and revealing Netflix’s ability to dramatically increase IP value. In 2025, KPop Demon Hunters became a global hit, largely enabled by Netflix’s algorithmic distribution.

Great content still needs distribution and effortless access to prove its worth. KPop Demon Hunters succeeded on merit, but only because those merits were accessible on the world’s largest streaming service.

Netflix executives appear to have concluded that licensing leaves money on the table. If Netflix can uniquely increase IP value, owning that IP becomes the logical step. Forcing consolidation in Hollywood and removing a rival streamer in the process only strengthens the case, despite the risks and high price.

## Netflix’s Market and Threat

The removal of a rival streamer raises regulatory scrutiny. Media mergers receive intense oversight, and this deal will be no exception. President Trump publicly noted concerns about market share, signaling a lengthy Justice Department review.

This deal differs from past cases. It is partly vertical, with a distributor acquiring a supplier, which is typically approved. However, Netflix is likely to make Warner Bros. content exclusive over time, sacrificing short term licensing revenue for long term pricing power.

It is also partly horizontal, as Netflix is effectively acquiring and shutting down a competing streaming service. Horizontal mergers receive greater scrutiny because they reduce competition. Netflix may argue that HBO Max customers largely overlap with Netflix subscribers, and that consumers benefit by paying for fewer services in the short term.

Ultimately, the case hinges on market definition. If defined narrowly as subscription streaming, Netflix faces challenges. If defined as TV viewing broadly, including linear TV and YouTube, Netflix’s share is far smaller, and its primary threat becomes clear.

That threat is YouTube. YouTube dominates consumer time spent, including on TVs, and does so with content acquired for free. It will always have more new content than any professional studio.

Professionally produced content’s advantage lies in longevity and rewatchability. Libraries matter. Netflix’s ability to make library content more valuable explains why it may be initiating Hollywood’s end game now. The true threat to Hollywood is not just free distribution, but the fact that anyone can now create content, and that reality is already winning in the market.

Strong rumors of an upcoming acquisition in the security sector

Anyone know what we’re doing with them? resale?

Looks like the layoffs are put on hold for the time being with the acquisition of KC.

Hope you all still hanging in there aren't getting abused between doing more with less, major changes to ACA, plus onboarding another Blue on top of it.

The silence in Honeywell is concerning. The more I think about what is coming next and seeing how much staff cuts are happening, a shrinkage is inevitable. There are only two paths that seem possible:

1. HON LT and BoD already have some transformational M&A of some type of a mega merger or mega acquisition in the works to shape the new narrative, or
2. Focus on the Aero split just like GE did and then handover Honeywell to a new CEO to drive the next phase of transformation to a different company.

What do these mean for staff? What else could happen next?

https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/south-koreas-sk-ford-motor-end-us-battery-joint-venture-2025-12-11/

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/grocery/shopping/2025/12/10/interim-kroger-ceo-buys-boston-home-for-11-5m-report-says/87709886007/

The settlement requires the largest divestiture of outpatient healthcare services to resolve a merger challenge (by number of facilities) and imposes a $1.1M civil penalty for false certification
The United States District Court for the District of Maryland today entered the Final Judgment proposed by the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division, together with its state co-Plaintiffs, requiring broad divestitures to resolve Plaintiffs’ challenge to UnitedHealth Group Incorporated’s (UnitedHealth) $3.3 billion acquisition of Amedisys Inc. In addition, Amedisys must pay a $1.1 million civil penalty to the United States for falsely certifying that it had provided “true, correct, and complete” responses under the Hart-Scott-Rodino (HSR) Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976.

“Under President Trump and Attorney General Pam Bondi, this Department of Justice has moved quickly to resolve transactions, ensuring Americans see the benefits sooner,” said Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward. “This settlement preserves competition where it matters most for American families – healthcare.”

“This is a tremendous outcome for competition in the healthcare industry, where competition itself is critical to the public interest and the well-being of all Americans,” said Assistant Attorney General Abigail Slater of the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division. “I commend the Antitrust Division’s Staff for prosecuting this case throughout a contentious litigation to reach this settlement on behalf of seniors, hospice patients, nurses, and their families.”

The settlement requires UnitedHealth and Amedisys to divest at least 164 home health and hospice locations (including one affiliated palliative care facility) across 19 states, accounting for approximately $528 million in annual revenue. By number of facilities, this is the largest divestiture of outpatient healthcare services to resolve a merger challenge. In addition, the proposed settlement:

Obligates UnitedHealth to divest eight additional locations if it fails to obtain regulatory approval for the divestiture of associated facilities without the additional locations;
Imposes a monitor to supervise UnitedHealth’s divestiture of the assets and compliance with the consent decree;
Provides the divestiture buyers with the assets, personnel, and relationships to compete against UnitedHealth in the overlap areas;
Incorporates robust protections to strengthen adherence to the decree and deter interference with the divestiture buyers’ ability to compete; and
Requires Amedisys to pay a $1.1 million civil penalty and train its corporate and field leadership on antitrust compliance for falsely certifying that the company had truthfully, correctly, and completely responded to the United States’ requests for documents.
The Court has appointed William E. Berlin, of Hall, Render, Killian, Heath & Lyman, to serve as monitor in this matter.

UnitedHealth is a vertically integrated insurer, healthcare provider, pharmacy benefit manager, and healthcare software and services vendor headquartered in Eden Prairie, Minnesota. UnitedHealth acquired Amedisys’s home health and hospice rival LHC Group Inc. (LHC) in 2023. Amedisys was a home health and hospice

Do you think Oracle will spin off business units to raise cash?

With the announcement yesterday alongside the rebranding a separate email said that the UK&I was to become a separate entity, wonder if eventually it will be sold off?

It's not often that an acquisition is completed and all employees of the acquired/sold org remain employed. Are we looking at the same thing? I'm just hoping that if we're looking at layoffs once we're officially no longer part of Teleflex, it's not anything major outside of redundant positions.

Good luck to everyone.

Certainly helped AIG stock today! Interesting read: https://www.investing.com/news/stock-market-news/chubb-reportedly-makes-takeover-offer-for-aig-stock-soars-93CH-4401708

https://www.wsj.com/video/att-ceo-not-surprised-by-netflix-warner-deal/BE9CCAD6-870E-4A25-829C-FE43921B35E0

The Street sees through the smoke and mirrors.

https://www.investors.com/news/technology/ibm-stock-confluent-cflt-news-ai-software/

Any rummors about possible divestment of Shell Chemicals ? Have heard that they want to somehow separate it.

Where are we with this? Is the BT / Private Equity move true ?

Will this be the next move per pressure from Elliott?

Any update news? We don't care about employee layoffs now. It will always happen at anytime, no matter of the company conditions. Who are going to buy Intel?

AT&T (T) chief executive John Stankey will speak at Tuesday’s UBS Global Media & Communications Conference where he will discuss the company’s network and financial outlook.

Besides the mid-band spectrum the company agreed to acquire from EchoStar (SATS), AT&T (T) expects to continue to accelerate the pace of its fiber reach through an agreement to acquire substantially all of Lumen’s (LUMN) Mass Markets fiber internet connectivity business.

This transaction is expected to close in early 2026 and will enable the company to reach more than 60 million total fiber locations by the end of 2030.

The company said it is also on track to achieve its 2025 financial goals and return $4 billion to shareholders through share repurchases in 2025 and $20 billion of share repurchase capacity during 2025 and 2027.

This includes consolidated service revenue growth in the low single-digit range, adjusted EPS in the higher end of $1.97 to $2.07 range, and adjusted EBITDA growth of 3% or better.

Subscriber net additions to its mobility business will be higher during the second half of 2025 than it reported during the first half, including an expectation for seasonal trends in net adds during Q4.

Additionally, AT&T (T) expects its net debt-to-adjusted EBITDA ratio will return to its 2.5x target within roughly three years of closing the EchoStar transaction and achieve “strong free cash flow” from the Lumen and EchoStar acquisitions.

NetDocuments acquired eDocs from Opentext. Does anyone know of any other noncore solution being sold off?

https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/opentext-sells-non-core-business-120629553.html

Apparently the Confluent Cloud is not a Cluster*fook

Confluent's cloud revenue was a primary driver of growth in 2025, with Q3 2025 cloud revenue reaching $161 million, a 24% increase year-over-year.

Confluent reported its Q3 2025 earnings in October 2025, where total revenue surpassed Wall Street expectations.

The company was recently announced to be acquired by IBM in an $11 billion deal, a transaction expected to close by mid-2026.

Confluent's annual revenue for the trailing twelve months ending September 30, 2025, was $1.113 billion, a 21.58% increase year-over-year.
More detailed financial data is available through Confluent's investor relations website.

Confluent 2025 Revenue Breakdown
Fiscal Period Total Revenue Subscription Revenue
Q1 2025 $271.1 million $261.0 million
Q2 2025 $282.3 million $271.0 million
Q3 2025 $298.5 million $286.3 million
Q4 2025 Outlook N/A $295.5 - $296.5 million
FY 2025 (Total) ~$1.16 billion $1.1135 - $1.1145 billion

What happened Paramount launched a $108.4 billion hostile bid for Warner Bros Discovery, outbidding Netflix's $72 billion offer. Paramount's bid includes $18 billion more in cash and aims to challenge Netflix's dominance.
Why it matters This bid could impact streaming services, movie theaters, and consumers by enhancing competition. It also raises antitrust concerns due to the consolidation of major television operators.


Key details


• When: Paramount's bid was launched on Monday, December 8.
• Who: Paramount Skydance (PSKY.O), Netflix (NFLX.O), Warner Bros Discovery (WBD.O).


• Numbers: Paramount's bid is $108.4 billion, including $18 billion more in cash than Netflix's offer. Paramount's offer is $30 per share, a 139% premium over Warner Bros Discovery's undisturbed stock price. Netflix's offer is $27.75 per share, mixing cash and stock.
• Financing: Paramount's offer includes financing from Affinity Partners (Jared Kushner's firm), Middle Eastern government-run investment funds, and the Ellison family.
• Regulatory concerns: Paramount's offer may face antitrust scrutiny, as it would create a major television operator and increase market share.


• Market reaction: Paramount shares up 7.7%, Warner Bros Discovery up 5%, Netflix shares down 4.5%.


• Next steps: Paramount will appeal to shareholders, regulators, and politicians to challenge Netflix's bid. The battle may become prolonged.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/transactional/paramount-makes-1084-billion-bid-warner-bros-discovery-2025-12-08/

Meta has acquired AI-wearables startup Limitless, maker of a pendant-style device that records and transcribes real-world conversations, as the social media giant doubles down on efforts to build AI-enabled consumer hardware.

https://www.reuters.com/business/meta-acquires-ai-wearables-startup-limitless-2025-12-05/

Every acquisition brings layoffs and one of this magnitude will certainly result in a major, major RIF. People in what could be considered redundant positions (and there are many of those) should start looking right away. You have about a year or so before this becomes a reality.

A job i applied to I had heard good feedback however was told due to the acquisition the role is on hold and detail on how long this could be? Is this normal here? Seems like larger internal things are not being shared

Paramount was poised to buy Warner Bros. Discovery. What went wrong
By Meg James and Stacy Perman
Dec. 6, 2025

Paramount’s 30 dollars per share bid for Warner Bros. Discovery, backed by Larry Ellison, collapsed Friday when Netflix swept in with a competing 82.7 billion dollar deal. Analysts and auction insiders told The Times that several issues complicated Paramount’s effort, including low initial offers and overconfidence. Paramount is accusing Warner Bros. Discovery of rigging the auction and is expected to press regulators to block the Netflix deal as anti competitive.

Source: https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2025-12-06/paramount-larry-ellison-hollywood-warner-bros-netflix-skydance-sarandos

Ellison, the Oracle founder, had recently financed his son David’s 8 billion dollar acquisition of Paramount Pictures. The Ellison family then moved to acquire Warner Bros. Discovery for at least 60 billion dollars. With substantial financial backing and support from President Trump, many Wall Street analysts and Hollywood insiders assumed Paramount would win.

But Netflix shocked the industry by announcing its own blockbuster agreement to acquire the Burbank studio, HBO Max and HBO for 82.7 billion dollars. The Warner board judged Netflix’s 27.75 dollars per share offer, which excluded CNN and other basic cable channels, a better deal for shareholders. It was a rare defeat for Ellison and a victory for Netflix’s co CEO Ted Sarandos.

Auction insiders said Paramount’s first major misstep was submitting low ball bids. By mid October, Paramount had made three unsolicited offers, starting at 19 dollars a share. The Warner board unanimously rejected them as too low. Some Warner executives were irritated, feeling the Ellisons had swept into Hollywood and were trying to exploit the studio’s weakened state.

Paramount’s bid relied on Ellison’s pledge of 30 billion dollars in Oracle stock, according to a person familiar with the matter. As bidding escalated, Paramount sought additional capital from Apollo Global Management. When Warner opened the process to other suitors in late October, Netflix and Comcast joined. Paramount underestimated Netflix, in part because a senior Netflix executive had downplayed interest in public.

Analysts speculated that Netflix had been playing possum. One auction insider said Paramount acted as if it were the only serious contender. Meanwhile, David Ellison and RedBird Capital’s Gerry Cardinale were trying to secure funding from Middle Eastern sovereign wealth funds. Their outreach to Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates raised concerns among Warner board members about the stability of the Paramount offer. The fall of Oracle stock during broader market concerns about an AI bubble further complicated Paramount’s position.

Ellison’s ties to Trump also generated concern in Hollywood. Oracle is among the US investors expected to take a majority stake in TikTok’s US business after its separation from ByteDance, a move influenced by Trump. Paramount’s recent 16 million dollar settlement of Trump’s lawsuit against CBS over an edited 60 Minutes interview, its cancellation of Stephen Colbert’s show due to losses, and David Ellison’s hiring of Bari Weiss to run CBS News all contributed to perceptions of political alignment. Trump publicly praised the Ellisons and expressed support for the Paramount bid.

Paramount’s agreement to distribute Brett Ratner’s Rush Hour 4 just after renewed pressure from Trump added fuel to that perception. Some observers said the once advantageous relationship with the administration began to seem less appealing to potential regulators and international partners.

A White House meeting last month addressed Paramount’s bid and concerns about Netflix. During the same week, David Ellison attended a White House dinner for Saudi crown prince Mohammed bin Salman. A Guardian report, citing anonymous sources, claimed White House officials had informally discussed with Larry Ellison a list of CNN anchors Trump disliked and wanted removed if Paramount won the auction. That report raised alarms among foreign regulators.

People close to Paramount argued that CEO David Zaslav and board member emeritus John Malone were biased against the Ellisons and that Zaslav wanted to maintain his status as a Hollywood mogul. Paramount ultimately submitted six offers, including a final 30 dollars per share proposal, but none matched Netflix’s bid.

According to those familiar with the process, Paramount executives realized last Monday that they had been beaten. Two days later, the company accused Warner Bros. Discovery of abandoning any semblance of a fair auction process. Netflix said Friday that its deal will take 12 to 18 months to secure regulatory approval. Approval is far from guaranteed due to antitrust concerns about Netflix’s market strength.

Warner Bros. Discovery now faces a legal fight over its handling of the auction.

Larry Ellison, often remembered in Hollywood for a cameo in Iron Man 2 in which Tony Stark calls him the Oracle of Oracle, has long funded the film careers of his children David and Megan. Despite his age, the 81 year old Ellison remains deeply involved at Oracle as executive chairman and chief technology officer.

Ellison grew up in a modest South Side Chicago apartment, raised by relatives after his teenage mother gave him up. After dropping out of the University of Chicago, he moved to California, worked various programming jobs and helped develop early database systems at Ampex. Those ideas eventually became the core of Oracle, which he co founded in 1977 with 1,200 dollars and concepts inspired by an IBM research paper. Oracle grew rapidly, won its first contract with the CIA, went public in 1986 and propelled Ellison to billionaire status by 1993.

Ellison developed a reputation for flamboyance and intensity. He collected super yachts, fighter jets, mansions and samurai swords, and won the America’s Cup twice. He was unafraid of confrontation, once hiring investigators to comb through Microsoft’s trash during the company’s antitrust trial, calling it his civic duty.

At Oracle, Ellison pushed into cloud computing, healthcare and AI, partnering with Nvidia, Meta and xAI.

Hollywood, however, was shaped by his children. With large trusts of Oracle and NetSuite stock, both entered the film business. Megan founded Annapurna, known for films like Zero Dark Thirty and Her. David tried acting and produced the unsuccessful 2006 film Flyboys before launching Skydance Media, producing major hits including Top G-n Maverick, Star Trek and Grace and Frankie and expanding into animation, sports and gaming.

Larry Ellison stepped in when needed, including restructuring Annapurna in 2018 after heavy losses. He financed David’s 8 billion dollar deal to buy Paramount and holds nearly 78 percent of the new company’s stock. The family announced plans to rejuvenate Paramount through technology investments and franchise building around Top G-n, Star Trek and Yellowstone.

They also made clear they are not walking away from Warner Bros. Discovery. Those who know Ellison say he should not be underestimated. History shows he is always ready for a fight.