zlacker

[return to "Netflix to Acquire Warner Bros"]
1. afavou+Jd[view] [source] 2025-12-05 13:44:09
>>meetpa+(OP)
Any consolidation like this seems like a negative for consumers. But at least it wasn’t bought by Larry Ellison, as was considered very likely (assuming this merger gets approved, in the current administration you never know).

From a Hacker News perspective, I wonder what this means for engineers working on HBO Max. Netflix says they’re keeping the company separate but surely you’d be looking to move them to Netflix backend infrastructure at the very least.

◧◩
2. meowfa+um[view] [source] 2025-12-05 14:28:30
>>afavou+Jd
Maybe there are licensing restrictions or other things that prevent it, but wouldn't it make more sense to combine HBO Max and Netflix into a single app? Or at least make all HBO Max content also available in Netflix (and then eventually sunset HBO Max). That would make a Netflix subscription a much more compelling purchase for a ton of people.
◧◩◪
3. Comput+8o[view] [source] 2025-12-05 14:35:06
>>meowfa+um
They might make less money with one super subscription than two separate ones.
◧◩◪◨
4. alista+up[view] [source] 2025-12-05 14:41:16
>>Comput+8o
Yeah, I can easily see something like 2 separate at $20/month vs 1 super at $35/month (make-believe figures).

Assuming all WB and Netflix customers move to the super platform, that's a loss for Netflix (assuming the super platform doesn't significantly reduce their costs).

And the $35 might be more than some set of current Netflix subscribers want to pay, so they drop the service, so an even bigger potential loss.

Certainly, I have no desire to subsidize sports fans via a higher Netflix super package.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. philis+Ls[view] [source] 2025-12-05 14:55:24
>>alista+up
We're reinventing cable!
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. ghaff+Hv[view] [source] 2025-12-05 15:08:32
>>philis+Ls
The irony is that a lot of people complained loudly about the cable bundle then complained loudly about streaming service fragmentation even when it at least offered a choice to cut their monthly bill.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. alista+9U[view] [source] 2025-12-05 16:48:09
>>ghaff+Hv
There was a brief happy period where you could ditch cable ($100/month or whatever), subscribe to ~2-3 streaming services (~2-3x $20/month), save a decent amount and still have a good selection of content. And bonus, you didn't have any ads.

Then the fragmentation got worse, as all the legacy media companies rolled out their own platforms, and it suddenly became ~5x$20/month to get the same content. And ads got added back into the mix, even after subscription fees.

These days, I actively switch platforms every few months. It's a bit annoying, but beats the old cable days.

My biggest complaint today is the fragmentation across some sports. Take pro cycling (TDf, etc) - it's split across 3-4 platforms in the US. So, I need to get FloSports, Peacock, and a few others. I wish I could either get individual events OR a bundle that included everything. Oh well, I'll pay for a few and pirate the Sky or continental feeds for the rest.

[go to top]