There's a scene in Joker where Arthur Fleck says: "The worst part of having a mental illness is people expect you to behave as if you don't." Yeah, well. The worst part of the American media market is that everyone acts like these billion-dollar mergers are about "creating value for the consumer" — when the game is really about power, sovereign money, and political connections.
Let's get to the facts.
Netflix Left the Building
On Thursday, Warner Bros. Discovery announced that Paramount Skydance's revised offer — $31 per share — was superior to Netflix's proposal. Ted Sarandos and Greg Peters, Netflix's co-CEOs, said it was no longer "financially attractive" to match the bid.
Translation from corporate-speak: Netflix looked at the price, looked at the monstrous regulatory risk they'd be facing, and said "screw it, not worth the headache."
And honestly, it makes sense.
Combining Netflix with WBD would create a streaming Leviathan. Netflix is already the 800-pound gorilla in the room. Add HBO Max (131.6 million subscribers at the end of 2025) and Paramount+ (78.9 million) under the same umbrella? Even Trump — who normally doesn't give a damn about regulating anything — said back in December that the deal "could be a problem." Then he backtracked, punting to the Department of Justice like Pontius Pilate washing his hands.
Paramount Went All In (With Serious Cash)
Paramount didn't mess around. They bumped the offer from $30 to $31 per share. They put a $7 billion penalty on the table in case the deal doesn't clear regulatory approval. And they already paid the $2.8 billion breakup fee that WBD owed Netflix for walking away from their previous agreement.
Read that again? Already paid. Almost 3 billion dollars thrown on the table before the deal is even approved. That's skin in the game in the most visceral sense Taleb could ever imagine.
But where's all that money coming from?
That's where the story gets interesting — and a little dirty.
The Arabian Elephant in the Room
Paramount's proposal has drawn criticism because part of the financing comes from sovereign wealth funds in Saudi Arabia, Abu Dhabi (United Arab Emirates), and Qatar. The company has already said these funds waived all governance rights, including board representation. But let's be real: when a Persian Gulf sovereign fund puts billions into a deal, the idea that they'll have zero influence is, at the very least, naive.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta (Democrat) already warned Thursday night: "this is not a done deal." California's Department of Justice has an open investigation into the transaction.
And Senator Elizabeth Warren? She called the merger "an antitrust disaster that threatens higher prices and fewer choices for American families." Classic Warren. But this time she's not entirely wrong.
The Trump Factor (Because There's Always a Trump Factor)
Here's where the political spice comes in. David Ellison, CEO of Paramount Skydance, is the son of Larry Ellison — co-founder of Oracle and a regular fixture in Trump's inner circle. Jared Kushner, the president's son-in-law, is financially backing the Paramount deal, according to documents filed with the SEC.
Connect the dots. I don't need to spell it out.
Analysts at Raymond James said Friday that the Paramount-WBD merger presents "considerably lower regulatory risk" than the Netflix proposal. And that's true: two traditional media companies joining forces is less scary to the government than the planet's largest streamer swallowing yet another conglomerate.
What Does This Actually Mean?
We're watching the inevitable consolidation of American media. The "every company gets its own streaming platform" model is dying. You can't have 47 platforms, each one burning billions on original content, with nobody actually making money (except Netflix, which already crossed the scale threshold it needed).
The question isn't whether there will be consolidation. It's who gets the pieces — and who pays the price when regulators decide to put on a show.
Paramount has the political connections. It has the Arab money. It has the billion-dollar commitment penalty. But it also has a divided Congress and a California Attorney General hungry for the spotlight.
Sovereign money from the Gulf financing the merger of two American media giants, with the president's son-in-law backing the deal. Tell me: does this look like a free market at work, or an episode of House of Cards that the writers scrapped for being too far-fetched?
