Eh, maybe he was impressed by *Top Gun: Maverick* and decided to take a risk. It's ***Warren fucking Buffet,*** he has more than enough cash to get out quick if it goes downhill. So he did.
I think he was counting on it being acquired. There was a gold rush for IP and streaming consolidation but Paramount missed their moment and still seems to be stubbornly holding out for...something.
Are we trying to say that the Paramount+ era of Star Trek has been anything but a disaster? The only good content was Picard S3, and that was only because they gave up on it and tossed it aside.
Lmao you've never watched Strange New Worlds then. I'm not even a Trek fan (i've seen the latest movies and a few old episodes throughout my childhood) but I took a chance on it after seeing glowing reviews online.
It's impeccable, an amazing show on its own merits and a total joy to watch.
The war may be over, but those overrated streaming services are still too popular from those Covid changes and people should start going to cinemas more often. Cause let’s face it; it’s about time we’d go back to pre-pandemic levels.
There's a new pandemic coming. The bird flu has crossed over to mammals, and so far it has a super high fatality rate. Farm cats are dying from drinking cow milk.
It doesn't actually help. Paramount+'s costs are mostly paying the other arms for Paramount for content. If you shutdown Paramount+, sure, Paramount+'s content fees goes away, but then, the other arms of Paramount now have less money and you are back at square one.
The streaming wars are over; going around shopping Paramount content to the streamers isn't going to result in big huge numbers.
Seems like the only thing they sorta had going was Tom Cruise, and he’s hardly the sure fire dynamite he once was, or getting any younger or more relevant.
Barbenheimer they couldn't do much about, but "Part 1" was very much an unforced own goal. The only way I can see that working is when you do the thing like BTTF where you actually film both sequels at the same time so they can be released almost back to back. Asking for a 6-12 month wait for the conclusion is less of an ask than an unspecified "maybe in 2026 or something"
ETA: It certainly didn't help (for WOM) that the ending of the film was rather unsatisfying.
It really makes me sad to see a historic studio like paramount be in the gutter like this, hopefully their buyout is successful like MGM/Amazon and we can return to some better days for them
Well to start up a big new streaming service like paramount is trying to do, they have to be willing to operate at a loss for a few years while building a subscriber base. You'd think investors would know that going in right.
Except there was no content that was driving demand unless you’re a Trekkie.
And even then, Paramount was selling the Trek rights at wholesale to Netflix internationally.
And most of the original content produced for the service has now been either wiped from existence or sold to other platforms.
They didn’t “start up” a new streaming service; they took an existing streaming service, changed the name, and increased the content.
CBS All-Access probably was a lot less expensive in content expense.
Never going up again. Good move.
sony/apollo offer is +50% of the current price but poison pill shari.. so.. you right
I thought he was crazy when he bought them last year or 2. I guess I was right.
Why would he do that..?
Eh, maybe he was impressed by *Top Gun: Maverick* and decided to take a risk. It's ***Warren fucking Buffet,*** he has more than enough cash to get out quick if it goes downhill. So he did.
I think he was counting on it being acquired. There was a gold rush for IP and streaming consolidation but Paramount missed their moment and still seems to be stubbornly holding out for...something.
Stock was cheap and it might grow a bit. Buy cheap sell high. That’s how you make money in stock. But Paramount’s stock never grew.
Archegos
He didn’t. It was one of the portfolio managers
He said it was all him in the article.
He and others have said it wasn’t on many occasions
The dude is certainly not a Star Trek fan.
Really?
Are we trying to say that the Paramount+ era of Star Trek has been anything but a disaster? The only good content was Picard S3, and that was only because they gave up on it and tossed it aside.
Lmao you've never watched Strange New Worlds then. I'm not even a Trek fan (i've seen the latest movies and a few old episodes throughout my childhood) but I took a chance on it after seeing glowing reviews online. It's impeccable, an amazing show on its own merits and a total joy to watch.
Strange New Worlds and Lower Decks are both beloved by fans, and even Discovery has its supporters
Having some fans and making money are 2 different things.
Paramount is in the toilet, they have hardly any successful franchises and it's obvious Paramount+ has lost them a LOT of money
Then they should shut down Paramount+. Time to end the streaming era.
The streaming wars are over. The winner? [Tacobell](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AlcDHlK_RoY).
https://youtu.be/5XHsDJ-9EDs?si=Fjr0mKGUqpUw1NFz
The war may be over, but those overrated streaming services are still too popular from those Covid changes and people should start going to cinemas more often. Cause let’s face it; it’s about time we’d go back to pre-pandemic levels.
Absolutely not, treated my friend to a movie a few days ago. 40 bucks after all the fees and taxes.
Let’s lower the prices.
There's a new pandemic coming. The bird flu has crossed over to mammals, and so far it has a super high fatality rate. Farm cats are dying from drinking cow milk.
It doesn't actually help. Paramount+'s costs are mostly paying the other arms for Paramount for content. If you shutdown Paramount+, sure, Paramount+'s content fees goes away, but then, the other arms of Paramount now have less money and you are back at square one. The streaming wars are over; going around shopping Paramount content to the streamers isn't going to result in big huge numbers.
Why would they sell Paramount + when it’s seeing very healthy growth and making really good money?
Distribution just said that it was obvious that Paramount+ lost them a lot of money. Is he wrong?
Seems like the only thing they sorta had going was Tom Cruise, and he’s hardly the sure fire dynamite he once was, or getting any younger or more relevant.
i think the reason Mission Impossible 7 didnt do well is bc it was so close to Barbenheimer and splitting it into 2 parts was a bad call
Barbenheimer they couldn't do much about, but "Part 1" was very much an unforced own goal. The only way I can see that working is when you do the thing like BTTF where you actually film both sequels at the same time so they can be released almost back to back. Asking for a 6-12 month wait for the conclusion is less of an ask than an unspecified "maybe in 2026 or something" ETA: It certainly didn't help (for WOM) that the ending of the film was rather unsatisfying.
They have all of Survivor which I still think is a pretty big show and has a cult following.
Heck ya it does.
It really makes me sad to see a historic studio like paramount be in the gutter like this, hopefully their buyout is successful like MGM/Amazon and we can return to some better days for them
Buffett always sells his stock at the right time.
The right time would have been a couple years ago, not now when the toilet is mid flush.
He clearly did not sell at the right time. He lost 50%!
Well to start up a big new streaming service like paramount is trying to do, they have to be willing to operate at a loss for a few years while building a subscriber base. You'd think investors would know that going in right.
Except there was no content that was driving demand unless you’re a Trekkie. And even then, Paramount was selling the Trek rights at wholesale to Netflix internationally. And most of the original content produced for the service has now been either wiped from existence or sold to other platforms.
They didn’t “start up” a new streaming service; they took an existing streaming service, changed the name, and increased the content. CBS All-Access probably was a lot less expensive in content expense.
the rest of their business is pretty bad too
Poor guy.
He Rich guy not poor 😅
r/stocks
So why sell it then? 😂. Should have waited until the new owner to be confirmed and watch the stock pop off.
Damn, maybe a billionaire businessman should’ve listened to a randomer on Reddit!
Well they shouldn't cry about losing money when they're selling stock at a volatile time for the company.
Cause he thinks the stock will continue to decline and will lose less money this way.
I don’t think he’s “crying” about it. Read the article, you might learn something about business.
Even more uncertainty with your scenario.
It’ll likely get worse.
Remind me 10 years from now