Connect with us

Business

Netflix’s takeover of Warner Brothers is a nightmare for consumers

Published

on



If the government approves Netflix’s megadeal to buy Warner Brothers Discovery—the parent company of HBO Max and the mammoth library of Warner Bros. content—it would be a disaster for consumers and a deathblow for Hollywood. Giving the world’s largest streaming platform even more control over what Americans watch and what content gets produced will mean fewer options for consumers and, inevitably, higher prices.

There is another path forward. Paramount Skydance has submitted its own hostile bid to compete with Netflix’s. Combining Paramount Skydance with Warner Bros. Discovery would create a new competitor with the scale and resources necessary to challenge Netflix’s dominant grasp on the streaming and entertainment landscape. That deal would maintain – and arguably enhance – competition in the space, bolstering cost discipline and choices for consumers. Importantly, Paramount has also said it remains committed to theatrical releases, a stark contrast to Netflix, whose leadership has written off theaters as outdated and anti-consumer.

Instead, the Netflix acquisition of Warner Brothers will create an entity that would dominate the media industry. This year, Netflix announced its largest-ever subscriber increase to over 300 million users, making it the largest Subscription Video on Demand (SVOD) service in the U.S. and the world.

On the same day it released its subscriber increase it also announced a price hike. If this is any indication of what Netflix does when it has increased market power, consumers can expect higher subscription prices in a less competitive market.

Netflix promotes itself as an innovator: as recently as October, CEO Ted Sarandos told investors that the company is “more builders than buyers.” But its skyhigh bid for Warner Brothers suggests that its trendsetter days have peaked and it’s now pivoting toward acquisition for subscriber growth rather than spending money to create new content.

The streaming giant’s recent dispute with Hollywood writers, which ended with a $42 million settlement, seems to confirm Netflix’s pivot away from investing in new content. One industry analyst opined that “a Netflix purchase of Warner would be a death knell for some of the movie business’s most important aspects, properties, and long-held traditions.”

The merger between Warner Brothers and Netflix threatens to push the industry past a dangerous tipping point: The combined company would command about 30 to 40 percent of the market, giving it enough power to dictate the terms of engagement to consumers, content creators, and distributors alike.

The effect on the market could be significant, with some market analysts fearing that it would put an end to the so-called streaming wars. That’s hardly positive news for consumers, who reap the benefits of more content, greater innovation, and lower prices when companies have to compete for viewers.

The downstream impacts of the merger are also problematic for the market: A Warner Brothers acquisition would allow Netflix to exert its newfound power over theaters (it has a notorious reputation for refusing wide-release feature films), writers and creative directors, and the entire entertainment industry ecosystem that relies on the entertainment industry. Director James Cameron, a major player in the market, warned that a merger with Netflix would be a “disaster.”

The increased power the acquisition of Warner would give Netflix is not lost on federal trust busters: Senior White House officials raised concerns last month that a merger with the streaming giant could stifle competition and suggested that the FTC would be compelled to initiate an in-depth investigation of the transaction.

Open markets and robust competition drive innovation, which helps keep prices low, but when a handful of firms dominate an industry, competition disappears. Big Tech’s power has already shown us what happens when companies become “too big to challenge,” and Big Media seems to be intent on replicating that playbook.

The purpose of antitrust law should not be to regulate innovation out of existence, but to ensure that markets remain open, competitive, and aligned with the interests of consumers and the broader economy.

Warner Brothers’ leadership may believe that it is getting the best deal from Netflix. But the merger will surely face intense regulatory scrutiny, and for good reason—it would do a disservice to American consumers.

The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

What happens to old AI chips? They’re still put to good use and don’t depreciate that fast

Published

on



New AI chips seem to hit the market at a quicker pace as tech companies scramble to gain supremacy in the global arms race for computational power.

But that begs the question: What happens to all those older-generation chips?

The AI stock boom has lost a lot of momentum in recent weeks due, in part, to worries that so-called hyperscalers aren’t correctly accounting for the depreciation in the hoard of chips they’ve purchased to power chatbots.

Michael Burry—the investor of Big Short fame who famously predicted the 2008 housing collapse—sounded the alarm last month when he warned AI-era profits are built on “one of the most common frauds in the modern era,” namely stretching the depreciation schedule. He estimated Big Tech will understate depreciation by $176 billion between 2026 and 2028.

But according to a note last week from Alpine Macro, chip depreciation fears are overstated for three reasons.

First, analysts pointed out software advances that accompany next-generation chips can also level up older-generation processors. For example, software can improve the performance of Nvidia’s five-year-old A100 chip by two to three times compared to its initial version.

Second, Alpine said the need for older chips remains strong amid rising demand for inference, meaning when a chatbot responds to queries. In fact, inference demand will significantly outpace demand for AI training in the coming years.

“For inference, the latest hardware helps but is often not essential, so chip quantity can substitute for cutting-edge quality,” analysts wrote, adding Google is still running seven- to eight-year-old TPUs at full utilization.

Third, China continues to demonstrate “insatiable” demand for AI chips as its supply “lags the U.S. by several generations in quality and severalfold in quantity.” And even though Beijing has banned some U.S. chips, the black market will continue to serve China’s shortfalls.

Meanwhile, not all chips used in AI belong to hyperscalers. Even graphics processors contained in everyday gaming consoles could work.

A note last week from Yardeni Research pointed to “distributed AI,” which draws on unused chips in homes, crypto-mining servers, offices, universities, and data centers to act as global virtual networks.

While distributed AI can be slower than a cluster of chips housed in the same data center, its network architecture can be more resilient if a computer or a group of them fails, Yardeni added.

“Though we are unable to ascertain how many GPUs were being linked in this manner, Distributed AI is certainly an interesting area worth watching, particularly given that billions are being spent to build new, large data centers,” the note said.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

‘I had to take 60 meetings’: Jeff Bezos says ‘the hardest thing I’ve ever done’ was raising the first million dollars of seed capital for Amazon

Published

on



Today, Amazon’s market cap is hovering around $2.38 trillion, and founder Jeff Bezos is one of the world’s richest men, worth $236.1 billion. But three decades ago, in 1995, getting the first million dollars in seed capital for Amazon was more grueling than any challenge that would follow. One year ago, at New York’s Dealbook Summit, Bezos told Andrew Ross Sorkin those early fundraising efforts were an absolute slog, with dozens of meetings with angel investors—the vast majority of which were “hard-earned no’s.”

“I had to take 60 meetings,” Bezos said, in reference to the effort required to convince angel investors to sink tens of thousands of dollars into his company. “It was the hardest thing I’ve ever done, basically.”

The structure was straightforward: Bezos said he offered 20% of Amazon for a $5 million valuation. He eventually got around 20 investors to each invest around $50,000. But out of those 60 meetings he took around that time, 40 investors said no—and those 40 “no’s” were particularly soul-crushing because before getting an answer, each back-and-forth required “multiple meetings” and substantial effort.

Bezos said he had a hard time convincing investors selling books over the internet was a good idea. “The first question was what’s the internet? Everybody wanted to know what the internet was,” Bezos recalled. Few investors had heard of the World Wide Web, let alone grasped its commercial potential.

That said, Bezos admitted brutal honesty with his potential investors may have played a role in getting so many rejections.

“I would always tell people I thought there was a 70% chance they would lose their investment,” he said. “In retrospect, I think that might have been a little naive. But I think it was true. In fact, if anything, I think I was giving myself better odds than the real odds.”

Bezos said getting those investors on board in the mid-90s was absolutely critical. “The whole enterprise could have been extinguished then,” he said.

You can watch Bezos’ full interview with Andrew Ross Sorkin below. He starts talking about this interview gauntlet for seed capital around the 33-minute mark.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Google cofounder Sergey Brin said he was ‘spiraling’ before returning to work on Gemini

Published

on



Google cofounder Sergey Brin thought retiring from Google in 2019 would mean quietly studying physics for days on end in cafés. 

But when COVID hit soon after, he realized he may have made a mistake.

“That didn’t work because there were no more cafés,” he told students at Stanford University’s School of Engineering centennial celebration last week, Business Insider reported.

The transition from president of Google parent company Alphabet to a 40-something retiree ended up not being as smooth as he imagined, and soon after he said he was “spiraling” and “kind of not being sharp” as he stepped away from busy corporate life.

Therefore, when Google began allowing small numbers of employees back into the office, Brin tagged along and put his efforts into what would become Google’s AI model, Gemini. Despite being the world’s fourth-richest man with a net worth of $247 billion, retirement wasn’t for him, he said.

“To be able to have that technical creative outlet, I think that’s very rewarding,” Brin said. “If I’d stayed retired, I think that would’ve been a big mistake.”

By 2023, Brin was back to work in a big way, visiting the company’s office three to four times a week, the Wall Street Journalreported, working with researchers and holding weekly discussions with Google employees about new AI research. He also reportedly had a hand in some personnel decisions, like hiring. 

Skip forward to 2025 and Brin’s plans for a peaceful retirement of quiet study are out the window. In February, he made waves for an internal memo in which, despite Google’s three-day in-office policy, he recommended Google employees go into the company’s Mountain View, Calif. offices at least every weekday, and that 60 hours a week was the “sweet spot” of productivity.

Brin’s newfound efforts at work may have been necessary as OpenAI’s release of ChatGPT in 2022 caught the tech giant off guard, after it had led the field of AI research with DeepMind and Google Brain for years.

To be sure, Google for its part has been rising in the AI race. Analysts raved last month about Gemini 3, the company’s latest update to its LLM, and Google’s stock is up about 8% since its release. Meanwhile, OpenAI earlier this month declared a “code red,” its highest alert level, to improve ChatGPT. 

Brin added in the talk at Stanford that Google has an advantage in the AI arms race precisely because of the foundation it laid over years through its neural network research, its custom AI chips, and its data center infrastructure.

“Very few have that scale,” he said.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.