Paramount Skydance is betting its future on its streaming business, as gains at the media and entertainment company’s Paramount+ platform helped boost earnings for the fiscal fourth quarter of 2025.
On Wednesday, Paramount reported $8.1 billion in revenue for the three-month period that ended Dec. 31, up 2% compared to the previous year’s quarter. That was due to growth in its streaming business, which saw a 10% increase in quarterly revenue to $2.2 billion, as well as gains at Paramount’s filmed entertainment segment, which reported revenue of $1.3 billion,an increase of 16% compared to the previous year.
The company’s TV media business, however, had a tougher quarter.
That segment reported revenue of $4.7 billion, down 5% compared to last year, as traditional broadcast networks continue tolose subscribers. Paramount also cited a 10% decrease in advertising, partially due to a drop in political spending and not having the Big 10 championship as it did in 2024.
Paramount reported an operating loss of $339 million, which included $546 million in restructuring and transaction-related costsattributed to its merger with Skydance last year. Diluted losses per share totaled 52 cents, compared to a loss of 33 cents during the prior year.
Chief Executive David Ellison praised the company’s progress under his tenure, noting that investments in the film studio, original series, UFC and tech upgrades to Paramount+’s streaming platform and advertising would build momentum in the coming years.
“It’s been six months, but we really do feel good about the work the team has done to date,” he said during an earnings call with analysts Wednesday afternoon. “You can expect that to accelerate into the future quickly.”
The company said it expects total revenue of $30 billion for 2026, which would mark a 4% increase compared to 2025. Paramount signaled the primary driver of that growth will be its streaming business, though the company also anticipates a boost from its studio segment.
Company executives declined to answer questions on the call about Paramount’s bid to acquire rival Warner Bros. Discovery.
The only mention of the ongoing fight was in Paramount‘s letter to shareholders, which noted that the company was “confident” in its standalone strategy and growth trajectory, but that adding Warner would be an “accelerant to achieving these goals more quickly” and in a way that would be “economically compelling” for Paramount’s shareholders.
Paramount submitted a higher bid Monday offering $31 a share in cash to Warner Bros. Discovery investors. Previously, the offer was $30 a share.
The company also agreed to pay $7 billion to Warner should the deal fail to clear various regulatory hurdles. That was a $2 billion increase. (The previous commitment was $5 billion.)
Paramount reaffirmed that it would cover the $2.8 billion termination fee that Warner would owe Netflix if Warner abandoned its deal with the streamer.
Paramount also said it would pay a so-called ticking fee sooner. Now, the company said it would pay an additional $0.25 per quarter to shareholders after Sept. 30 until a Paramount-Warner transaction closed. It also agreed to cover Warner’s potential $1.5 billion in financing costs associated with a planned debt exchange offer.
Additionally, Paramountsaid it “agreed to an obligation to contribute additional equity funding to the extent needed to support the solvency certificate required by PSKY’s lending banks.” That provision was offered because Warner board members have expressed concerns that Paramount may not be able to round up sufficient financing to close such a gargantuan deal.
But the company’s earnings — and the declines its facing in its own TV business — raised concerns about the potential Warner acquisition, John Conca, analyst at Third Bridge, wrote in an email.
“It is becoming questionable why leadership is aggressively pursuing [Warner], a deal that would effectively double their exposure to dying linear networks while also creating even more massive integration headaches,” he said.
Nexstar Media Group is slashing personnel from its TV stations, including several on-air veterans at Los Angeles outlet KTLA.
Glen Walker and Lu Parker, anchors of KTLA’s late morning and midday newscasts, are out along with meteorologist Mark Kriski, according to people briefed on the moves not authorized to speak publicly.
Kriski had been with KTLA since 1991, while Walker has been at the station’s anchor desk since 2010. Parker joined KTLA in 2005.
A representative for Nexstar said the company does not comment on personnel issues, adding it is “taking steps necessary to compete effectively in this period of unprecedented change.”
The layoffs are part of a company-wide cost reduction across Nexstar’s stations. The Irving, Texas-based media giant, which recently agreed to a $6.2-billion merger with station group Tegna, is looking for savings as traditional TV viewing declines and puts pressure on ad revenue as consumers continue to move to video-streaming platforms.
Television station groups have been lobbying the government to lift restrictions that limit them to 39% coverage of U.S households. They say lifting the cap will enable them to better compete with technology companies that have no such restrictions.
Nexstar is the largest TV station ownership group in the U.S. It also operates the cable network NewsNation, which has been slow to make significant inroads against established channels CNN, Fox News and MSNBC since it launched in 2020.
Nexstar has been chipping away at the staff of its Chicago station WGN, which produces 12 hours of local news daily. A total of 21 people have been cut in recent weeks, including nine reporters and anchors on Monday.
Known locally as “Chicago’s Very Own,” WGN has long been a source of civic pride in the city. Insiders at the station say they have been deluged with emails and texts expressing dismay over Nexstar’s moves, which eliminated a number of staffers with decades of experience and institutional knowledge.
Among those let go is Dean Richards, WGN’s longtime entertainment reporter and critic who has been a fixture at Hollywood press junkets.
At New York’s WPIX, Nexstar eliminated at least three on-air positions, including weekend anchor and reporter John Muller and afternoon anchor Arrianee LeBeau, who covered transit for the morning newscast.
SAG-AFTRA, which represents employees at KTLA and WGN, issued a statement blasting the cuts.
“By laying off journalists across the country, Nexstar is eroding the resources and talent that local communities rely on for trusted news,” SAG-AFTRA President Sean Astin said. “These actions highlight the risks of media consolidation and underscore the urgent need for regulators and the company to prioritize the public interest and the professionals who serve it.
KTLA, WGN and WPIX have been part of Nexstar since 2019, when the company completed its acquisition of Tribune Broadcasting.
The pitched battle for Warner Bros. took yet another turn Monday night as Paramount Skydance enhanced its bid for the storied studio.
The decision by Warner Bros. Discovery to leave the door slightly ajar for Paramount came after weeks of pressure from its leader, tech scion David Ellison, and his billionaire father, Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison.
The media company has been vying to acquire Warner since late last year, and that fight only increased after the “Casablanca” and “Harry Potter” studio chose Netflix as the winning bidder back in December.
The bidding war has divided Hollywood’s creative community, with filmmakers, producers and unions all staking positions on the deal.
You’re reading the Wide Shot
Samantha Masunaga delivers the latest news, analysis and insights on everything from streaming wars to production — and what it all means for the future.
The latest to weigh in was “Avatar” and “Titanic” director James Cameron, who reportedly described Warner’s sale to Netflix as “disastrous for the theatrical motion picture business” in a Feb. 10 letter to Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), chair of the Senate subcommittee on antitrust, competition policy and consumer rights.
“I am very familiar not only with ships that sail, but also those that sink,” he wrote. “And the theatrical experience of movies could become a sinking ship.”
Actor Mark Ruffalo shot back at Cameron: “Are you also against the monopolization that a Paramount acquisition would create? Or is it just that of Netflix?” he posted on Threads over the weekend, adding that he was “speaking on behalf of hundreds of thousands of filmmakers worldwide.”
Regardless of which bidder prevails, consolidation in the industry is a major fear, particularly after waves of job cuts due to the pandemic and pullbacks in production spending amid streaming losses. And for the theatrical exhibition business, any merger revives concerns about an even greater decrease in films headed to theaters — particularly if the winning bidder is Netflix.
The health and future of cinemas is an especially sensitive topic in Hollywood. Box office revenue still has not returned to pre-pandemic levels, and some fear it never will, leaving theaters scrambling for alternative ways to fill their auditoriums.
Paramount has positioned itself as a champion for theatrical films, and David Ellison has said a combined Paramount and Warner Bros. would release 30 films a year.
But theater owner trade group Cinema United and the Writers Guild of America have warned that further consolidation would further concentrate the entertainment business, bringing more layoffs and theater closures.
Netflix co-Chief Executive Ted Sarandos has since tried to temper these concerns.
In a recent Senate subcommittee hearing, he pledged to maintain a 45-day theatrical window for Warner Bros. films, while also saying the deal would increase production investments going forward. In a recent letter to Lee responding to Cameron’s missive, Sarandos said he had previously spoken with the director in December about Netflix’s plans for Warner Bros., and that he had been “very supportive.”
To put it mildly, Trump is a deeply unpopular figure in liberal-leaning Hollywood.
Creatives have feared a chilling effect on speech, particularly after Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr has aggressively tried to enforce long-dormant rules that require broadcast TV stations to give equal time to opposing candidates. The free-speech matter came to a head last year, when Carr warned that ABC could lose its TV station licenses after late-night host Jimmy Kimmel made a remark about slain conservative activist Charlie Kirk.
More recently, the equal-time rules resurfaced when CBS late-night host Stephen Colbert blasted his own network over its handling of his interview with Democratic Senate candidate James Talarico. Colbert said that CBS told him he could not air the interview because it would require giving equal time to Talarico’s opponents in the Senate primary and that he was instructed not to talk about the issue on the air, which he refused. CBS has disputed Colbert’s comments, saying he was not prohibited from airing the interview.
News industry insiders also raised concerns after the installation of Bari Weiss as editor in chief of CBS News. Two months into her tenure, she made the decision to pull a “60 Minutes” episode that investigated the alleged abuse of detainees sent from the U.S. to an El Salvador prison, a highly unusual step that critics interpreted as a decision to placate the Trump administration.
CBS News, which aired the episode in January, denied the claim, saying the piece had only been held for additional reporting.
On the film side, Paramount continues to make deals with creatives, including the irreverent South Park creators, who have churned out parodies of the Trump administration, “Wicked” director Jon M. Chu and writer, producer and actor Issa Rae, who in a statement earlier this year vowed to “tell stories for and by the diverse communities that have supported my work over the years.”
As the Warner Bros. deal drama unfolds, we’ll see how the lines continue to form in Hollywood’s creative class.
Stuff We Wrote
Film shoots
Number of the week
Sony Pictures Animation’s “Goat” led the domestic box office this weekend with an estimated three-day total of $17 million, beating out the Margot Robbie and Jacob Elordi-led “Wuthering Heights.”
The film, which was also produced by Warriors star Stephen Curry’s production company, has bucked the trend for original animated movies, which have largely faltered at theaters in recent years.
Warner Bros. Discovery said Tuesday that it was “reviewing” a revised offer from Paramount Skydance — the latest twist in the high-profile auction to claim one of Hollywood’s corporate jewels.
The company did not provide any details of Paramount’s bid. Paramount separately confirmed that it submitted a revised offer.
In a short statement, Warner acknowledged that Paramount had submitted a modified proposal to buy all of the company’s outstanding shares and that board members were evaluating the offer “in consultation with our financial and legal advisors.”
“We will update our shareholders following the Board’s review,” Warner said.
The Larry Ellison-backed Paramount had been facing a late Monday night deadline to boost its bid to claim the company that owns CNN, HBO, TBS and the storied Warner Bros. movie and film studios. Last week, the auction’s winning bidder — Netflix — agreed to allow Warner Bros. Discovery to reopen talks with Paramount for seven days to determine whether Paramount would bring more money to the table.
Warner instructed Paramount to present its “best and final” offer.
The move comes nearly three months after Warner’s board unanimously agreed to sell HBO and studio assets, including its deep library that includes Superman, Harry Potter, Scooby-Doo, “Game of Thrones,” and “The Big Bang Theory,” to Netflix for $27.75 a share.
Netflix’s deal, valued at $82.7 billion, does not include Warner’s basic cable channels, including CNN, TBS and HGTV.
Those channels are slated to be spun off to a new company later this year.
But Paramount, managed by scion David Ellison, has repeatedly cried foul, saying its cash bid for all of Warner Bros. Discovery, including the Warner cable channels, would be more lucrative for shareholders. Paramount, which enjoys friendly relations with President Trump, has also boasted that it has a more certain path to win U.S. regulatory approval compared to Netflix.
But Warner Bros.’ board has stuck with Netflix’s bid, saying the streaming giant’s financing was more secure.
“The Netflix merger agreement remains in effect, and the Board continues to recommend in favor of the Netflix transaction,” Warner said in its Tuesday statement.
Warner Bros. Discovery told Paramount last week that it expected the billionaire Ellison to put more money into the deal.
Paramount has previously said that the tech billionaire would guarantee more than $41 billion in equity financing that was needed to pull of the more than $108-billion take-over.
Under Paramount’s previous offer, the Ellison family was planning to contribute about $12 billion. Another $24 billion was expected to come from the royal families from Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Abu Dhabi.
In recent weeks, Paramount agreed to cover a $2.8 billion break-up fee that Warner would owe Netflix should Warner walk away from the Netflix deal. Paramount also suggested that it would increase its offer to at least $31 a share.
The move comes amid heightened political interest in the monumental deal that would reshape Hollywood.
The Department of Justice is investigating whether a Netflix takeover, or Paramount’s alternative bid, would harm competition.
Republican lawmakers have been critical of the Netflix deal, saying it would blunt competition.
President Trump has said he didn’t plan to get involved in the investigation, but over the weekend he threatened Netflix, writing on social media that Netflix must fire Susan Rice, a former high-level Obama and Biden administration official, from its board or “pay the consequences.”
Warner Bros. Discovery is consulting with investment bankers from Allen & Company, J.P. Morgan and Evercore and the law firms Wachtell Lipton and Debevoise & Plimpton.
Disney California Adventure this month turns 25. Though Disneyland Park’s littler and much younger sibling, the park has grown into a respectable offering, one that ranks among my favorite Disney parks in North America. No small feat, considering its checkered, less-than-ambitious launch.
California Adventure is today emblematic of some of the best that Disney has to offer. And yet it remains a work in progress. The subject of constant tinkering, another reimagining is on the horizon.
With more Marvel, more “Avatar” and more Pixar due to be injected into the park, California Adventure stands at a crossroads. But also one with risks: Will it soon feel like a collection of brand deposits? This, of course, has appeared to be the vision of the company’s theme parks in the recent past. This doesn’t always have to be a negative. Consider it more a word of caution.
A “Coco” boat ride is destined for Disney California Adventure. The ride is under construction.
(Pixar / Disneyland Resort)
Few Disney properties, for instance, seem more ripe for exploration in a California-focused theme park than “Coco.” Under construction where Paradise Gardens and Pixar Pier meet, a “Coco”-inspired boat ride will give the park at long last a permanent home to recognize our state’s Latin culture and heritage. While fans may long for the days of original attractions such as Pirates of the Caribbean and the Haunted Mansion, those based on intellectual property — IP in industry speak — aren’t evil, especially when used to heighten the overall themes of the park. California Adventure’s own Cars Land is a key example.
When it starts to feel like retail, however, parks can become exhausting. Looking at you, Avengers Campus, a half-finished land with a bombastic orchestral score and familiar, urban design that wouldn’t be out of place in downtown L.A. In its current state, the land works best as a backdrop for live entertainment as it lacks the welcoming feel of Disney’s top creations.
California Adventure, at its most idealized, stood for more than an assortment of film properties. Its pitch was to show the Golden State as a romanticized destination, one that in the post-Gold Rush era has often given America permission to dream. It would capture our people, our nature, our food and our glamour through a lighthearted, optimistic lens. When completed, the park had a mini Golden Gate Bridge and giant letters that spelled out the name of our state (which were removed about a decade later).
By the time California Adventure opened in February 2001, it had already been the subject of much revision. The Walt Disney Co. wanted it to be a West Coast answer to Walt Disney World’s Epcot. Its plans at the time were well-documented, with the Walt Disney Co. initially giving Westcot, as it was to be called, a spherical answer to the Florida park’s Spaceship Earth. In time, and in attempts to quell neighborhood concerns, the globe’s design would shift to become a large, futuristic needle.
California Adventure in 2001 was meant to depict a romanticized vision of California.
(Mark Boster / Los Angeles Times)
None of it was to be. Financial headaches, caused in part by the early-year struggles of Disneyland Paris, inspired Disney to change course. Disney California Adventure would open with few attractions that rose to the Disneyland level, and yet The Times was kind in its opening coverage, praising the park’s change of pace from its neighbor and admiring how its architecture blurred fiction and reality.
The hang-gliding simulation Soarin’ Over California was an instant hit, and Eureka! A California Parade was Disney theatricality at its weirdest, with floats that depicted Old Town San Diego, Watts and more. But California Adventure’s prevalence of dressed-up county fair-like rides failed to command crowds. Disney’s own documentary “The Imagineering Story” took a tough-love approach, comparing some of its initial designs to those of a local mall.
The grand opening of California Adventure in February 2001.
(Mark Boster / Los Angeles Times)
And yet today it’s home to one of the Walt Disney Co.’s most fully-realized areas in Cars Land, which opened in 2012. Flanked by sun-scarred, reddish rocks that look lifted from Arizona, Cars Land is a marvel, and on par with the best of Walt Disney Imagineering’s designs (see New Orleans Square, Star Wars: Galaxy’s Edge and Pandora — the World of Avatar). Nodding to our Route 66 history, the land is a neon-lit, ‘50s rock leaning hub of activity, complete with the showstopping Radiator Springs Racers.
Cars Land led a major makeover of the park that also included the nostalgic Buena Vista Street, a nod to the Los Feliz era of the 1920s. And by the mid-2010s, many of California Adventure’s most insufferable traits, such as its ghastly puns (San Andreas Shakes was bad, but the Philip A. Couch Casting Agency was cringe-inducing) as well as the short-lived disaster of a ride that was Superstar Limo, had begun to disappear.
Cars Land, added to California Adventure in 2012, is one of Walt Disney Imagineering’s grandest achievements.
(Mark Boster / Los Angeles Times)
With the nighttime show World of Color, and a bevy of in-park entertainment, California Adventure pre-pandemic began to feel like something akin to a full-day park. It wasn’t perfect, of course — no park is.
The Little Mermaid — Ariel’s Undersea Adventure, though lightly charming, suffers from being a hodgepodge of familiar scenes from the film rather than a narrative tableau that can stand on its own. Too many empty buildings clutter its Hollywood Land area, the makeover of Paradise Pier into Pixar Pier did little but add garish film-referencing art to the land and the crowd-pleasing transformation of the Twilight Zone Tower of Terror into Guardians of the Galaxy — Mission: Breakout! was completed at the expense of the park’s prime Southern California theming.
Paradise Pier at California Adventure in 2002. The land has since been remade into Pixar Pier.
(Don Kelsen / Los Angeles Times)
But there is much about California Adventure to adore. It shines during holidays, whether that’s Lunar New Year at the top of the year or the back-to-back combo of Halloween and Christmas seasons near its end. Here is when California Adventure’s entertainment comes to the fore, bringing the park alive with cultural tales that at last reflect the diversity of the modern theme park audience.
How grand it would be, however, if California Adventure were blessed with this level of entertainment year-round. The Hyperion Theater, a 2,000-seat venue at the end of Hollywood Land, and once home to shows inspired by “Frozen,” “Aladdin” and “Captain America,” today sits empty. If the Walt Disney Co. can’t justify funding the theater, jettison it with the park’s upcoming makeover, as it stands as a reminder of how fickle the corporation can be when it comes to live performance (also gone, the great newsboy-inspired street show).
Staff at California Adventure put the final bit of polish on the letters that spell out “California” ahead of the park’s 2001 opening. The letters once stood at the entrance of the park.
(Mark Boster / Los Angeles Times)
Looking ahead, I expect Disney to deliver a powerful “Avatar” ride, and early concept art has shown a thrilling boat attraction that appears to use a similar ride system to Shanghai’s Pirates of the Caribbean: Battle for the Sunken Treasure, which is hailed by many as one of the company’s strongest modern additions. Worthy of debate, however, is how the pure fantasy landscape of “Avatar” fits in a park that still nominally tries to reflect California and our diversity.
And does it matter?
The company would likely argue that if the ride wows guests and extends the “Avatar” brand into another generation, that it does not. But Disneyland next door isn’t timeless because it has “Peter Pan” and “Star Wars.” It has endured for 70 years because its attractions, by and large, reflect cultural myths. And it’s a park we want to spend days in, thanks to its gorgeous landscaping, calming Rivers of America, and human tales of avarice, unity and romance spread throughout its attractions.
For theme parks, after all, can jump the shark, so to speak. Spend some time, for instance, sitting in California Adventure’s San Fransokyo Square. It’s a needless, post-pandemic makeover. What was once a simple food court has been transformed into a loud nook stuffed with a “Big Hero 6” meet-and-greet and gift shop. You’ll be transported, but to a place more akin to a marketing event.
So happy 25, California Adventure. We love you, and you’re a park worth celebrating, but like most post-collegiate kids, there’s still some room to learn.
As Paramount moved Monday to sweeten its bid for Warner Bros. Discovery, a high-stakes political battle is playing out behind the scenes.
Paramount’s latest offer enhanced its earlier $30-a-share bid, valued at $108 billion, said a person familiar with the process who was not authorized to comment publicly. Details of the revised proposal, first reported by Bloomberg, were not immediately available.
The firm is leveraging both the dynastic wealth of Larry Ellison’s empire and his ties to the Trump administration to dismantle Netflix’s rival $82.7-billion deal for Warner, which owns CNN, HBO and the premier Hollywood film and television studios, according to people close to the auction.
Over the weekend, President Trump turned up the heat, demanding that Netflix “IMMEDIATELY” fire Susan Rice — a former Obama and Biden administration official — who serves on Netflix’s 13-member board or “pay the consequences.”
Trump previously said he would not get involved in the pivotal Warner Bros. auction, instead leaving the matter to the Department of Justice, which is investigating whether a Netflix takeover, or Paramount’s alternative bid, would harm competition. Trump has been an outspoken critic of CNN and many of its on-air hosts.
Netflix won the bidding for the storied studio and HBO in December, prompting the spurned Paramount executives to launch a multipronged strategy to scuttle the Netflix deal.
Netflix co-Chief Executive Ted Sarandos sought to downplay the latest controversy, saying during a BBC interview Monday: “This is a business deal, it’s not a political deal.”
But Paramount, which declined to comment for this article, has not been shy about playing its political cards.
Warner Bros. Studio in Burbank.
(Myung J. Chun/Los Angeles Times)
The company, overseen by Larry Ellison’s son, David, is trying to convince Justice Department regulators and Warner Bros. shareholders that the Netflix deal is too dicey and that they should instead side with Paramount, said sources who were not authorized to comment publicly.
Paramount has attempted numerous maneuvers to gain the upper hand.
“This deal was never going to be decided on the merits of the offer or rigid antitrust considerations,” said Gabriel Kahn, a professor at the USC Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism. “This was a classic Trump administration deal where proximity to the president counts a lot more than financial terms.”
Trump’s Saturday night outburst came after Rice, during a podcast interview last week, said that “it is not going to end well” for corporations, media outlets and law firms that “bent the knee” to Trump should Democrats regain control in Washington.
The comments of Rice, a Netflix director for eight years, came as Paramount-owned CBS was involved in a headline-grabbing dust-up with late-night talk-show host, Stephen Colbert, over Trump’s Federal Communications Commission chair‘s threat to modify a rule requiring that broadcasters to give political candidates equal time. Colbert has accused his company of kowtowing to Trump, which CBS has denied.
Netflix’s Sarandos and Paramount’s David Ellison have made separate treks to the White House.
In October, Paramount hired a former Trump administration official, Makan Delrahim, who oversaw the Justice Department’s antitrust division during Trump’s first term, to quarterback Paramount’s campaign to win over regulators and politicians.
A formidable ally — Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) — recently visited Delrahim on Paramount’s Melrose Avenue lot in Los Angeles. While there, Cruz said he was a fan of the CBS show “NCIS,” which prompted Paramount executives to put together an impromptu tour of the “NCIS Origins” soundstages, according to a person familiar with the visit.
In December, Delrahim made a tactical move to apply for Justice Department approval of Paramount’s deal — despite the absence of a signed agreement with the Warner Bros. board and the consent of its shareholders. The gambit was meant to speed the agency’s approval should the Netflix deal crumble. Warner stockholders are expected to vote March 20.
Last week, Paramount announced that a major deadline had passed without pushback from the Justice Department. “There is no statutory impediment in the U.S. to closing Paramount’s proposed acquisition of WBD,” Paramount said in a regulatory filing.
Paramount faces a separate deadline late Monday to improve the finances of its proposed takeover to shake the support of Warner Bros. Discovery’s board members for the Netflix deal.
Paramount wants to buy all of Warner Bros. Discovery, including CNN.
Netflix, in contrast, does not want the bulk of cable TV channels beyond HBO, and has offered $27.75 a share. It has the right to match any improved Paramount proposal.
Warner is planning to spin off the bulk of its channel portfolio, including HGTV, TBS and Cartoon Network, in a separate company. Its shareholders will receive stock in that entity, slated to be called Discovery Global.
Concerns over Netflix’s deal have been mounting.
Department of Justice regulators have sent inquiries to the three companies, according to one senior executive who was not authorized to speak publicly. The department is said to be looking at Netflix’s historic business strategy of steering most of its film releases to its streaming platform, often bypassing movie theaters. Sarandos has promised to maintain a 45-day theatrical window for Warner Bros. films.
Bloomberg has reported that regulators also are trying to determine whether Netflix has exerted leverage over creators in negotiations when acquiring programming to build its catalog.
This month, Republican lawmakers blasted Sarandos during a Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy, and Consumer Rights hearing to explore antitrust implications of the Warner Bros. sale. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) sent Netflix a series of pointed follow-up questions, including: “If allowed to proceed, what effect will the merger have on future competition?”
Ted Sarandos, left, and David Zaslav at the 2026 Golden Globes.
(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)
The hearing also veered into culture wars, with Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) suggesting Netflix was promoting a “transgender ideology” to children, which Sarandos denied.
Another Missouri Republican, Sen. Eric Schmitt, accused Netflix of making some of “the wokest content in the history of the world.”
“Netflix has no political agenda of any kind,” Sarandos told the lawmakers.
David Ellison also was invited to appear at the Feb. 3 hearing, but he declined — which raised the eyebrows of some members of the panel.
Skydance Media founder and Chief Executive David Ellison, who leads Paramount, is shown in 2023 in New York.
(Evan Agostini / Invision / Associated Press)
Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) challenged Ellison for failing to answer lawmakers’ questions under oath, including about his dealings with the president.
Ellison instead responded with a statement but Booker and other lawmakers wrote back, saying Ellison’s statement “failed to address” the issues raised by Booker.
“The pattern of evasion, combined with Paramount’s apparent confidence that a politically sensitive transaction will clear without difficulty warrants serious scrutiny,” Booker, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and others wrote in the Feb. 19 letter.
The Democrats instructed Ellison “to preserve records related to the proposed Paramount-Warner Bros. Discovery transaction.”
The move came days after Gail Slater, the Justice Department’s antitrust chief, was bounced from her job, reportedly after becoming a thorn in the side of some business interests. Slater’s former top deputy, who also left the Justice Department, publicly warned that antitrust decisions are being influenced by corporate lobbyists — not in the interest of ordinary Americans.
“We see this happen again and again,” USC’s Kahn said.
“Let’s not forget that Larry Ellison’s Oracle was part of the consortium that purchased the U.S. operations of TikTok. Repeated complaints from the FCC about content at CBS have been heeded by the Ellison regime,” Kahn said, adding: “This is the reality of trying to do any business in the Trump administration: It’s about payoffs and proximity.”
After some initial resistance, CBS News has cut ties with contributor Peter Attia, whose name appears more than 1,700 times in the files of pedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
Attia, a physician who specializes in longevity medicine, was among the 19 contributors named last month by CBS News editor in chief Bari Weiss. A CBS News executive confirmed Attia’s departure Monday.
Attia’s resignation was agreed upon after discussions with Weiss, according to one of her associates. He had not appeared on the network since the announcement of his hiring in January.
Once Attia’s name showed up in the cache of Epstein files released by the Department of Justice earlier this month, it seemed as though cutting him loose would be a no-brainer for the news division.
But Weiss, who came to CBS News when parent company Paramount acquired her contrarian digital site the Free Press last fall, is highly skeptical of cancel culture and resisted immediate action, according to people familiar with her thinking.
A representative for Attia said he quit because “he wanted to ensure his involvement didn’t become a distraction from the important work being done at CBS.”
Any appearance on the network probably would have generated a spate of negative stories.
Attia’s email exchanges with Epstein included a crude discussion about female genitalia.
Another message showed Attia expressing dismay that he could not discuss Epstein’s activities. “You [know] the biggest problem with becoming friends with you? The life you lead is so outrageous, and yet I can’t tell a soul …,” Attia wrote.
In 2008, Epstein pleaded guilty to state charges of soliciting prostitution, including from a minor. He was found dead in his jail cell in 2019, about a month after being arrested on federal sex-trafficking charges
From a business standpoint, keeping Attia at CBS was untenable. Health-related segments are attractive to advertisers and it’s highly unlikely that any sponsor would want their commercials adjacent to him.
Attia had already been dropped by AGI, a company that makes powdered supplements,where he was a scientific advisor. He also stepped away from his role as chief science officer for David, a protein bar maker.
CBS News pulled an October “60 Minutes” profile of Attia that was scheduled to re-air this month.
Attia apologized for his interactions with Epstein. He said he had not been involved in any criminal activity and had never visited Epstein’s island.
“I apologize and regret putting myself in a position where emails, some of them embarrassing, tasteless, and indefensible, are now public, and that is on me,” Attia wrote. “I accept that reality and the humiliation that comes with it.”
Attia wrote the bestselling book “Outlive: The Science and Art of Longevity” and hosts a popular podcast. His company, Early Medical, offers a program that teaches people to live healthier as they age.
Disneyland Resort’s high percentage of California visitors has helped mitigate a dip in international tourists, an executive said Thursday.
More than 50% of the Anaheim theme park’s audience has typically been from California, Thomas Mazloum, president of Disneyland Resort, told reporters during a media event at Disney’s Grand Californian Hotel and Spa. As a result, the company has been able to quickly shift marketing focus to that audience, as well as its ongoing efforts to boost out-of-state attendance.
Company executives said they expected to see “modest” growth in its operating income for its experiences sector — which includes Disney’s theme parks — due to “headwinds” in foreign visitation trends to its domestic parks, as well as pre-launch costs for its new cruise ship and a “Frozen”-themed land in Disneyland Paris.
And as Disneyland Resort hit its 70th anniversary last year, the park is looking to grow and find new audiences to stay relevant for the future.
Because of the large number of California visitors, the company recently expanded its traditional deal for Southern California locals to all residents of the Golden State. Disneyland Resort has also made its lowest-price entry ticket of $104 available year-round to active-duty members of the U.S. armed forces, and introduced a new summer promotion pricing a one-day, park-hopper kids’ ticket at $50 a day.
The theme park is also looking to attract more young families. To that end, Disneyland Resort will open an immersive theater experience called “Bluey’s Best Day Ever!” on March 22 at the Fantasyland Theatre, a nod to the massive appeal of Australian animated show “Bluey.”
“I continue to say how critical it is to expand the audience,” Mazloum said. “I still see a lot of opportunity for people who haven’t discovered Disneyland yet.”
Disney California Adventure’s Monsters, Inc. Mike & Sulley to the Rescue! ride will also stay open into 2027, Mazloum said. The ride was originally scheduled to be retired this year to make way for an “Avatar” ride and experience, but after some planning from the engineering and operations teams, it can now stay open without negatively affecting construction and project progress, he said.
The park is also looking to increase spontaneity for visitors, and will eliminate the current 11 a.m. start time for park-hopping later this year, allowing guests to move back and forth between the parks at their leisure, Mazloum said.
The plans for growth at Disneyland Resort come as Disney recently named theme parks chief Josh D’Amaro as its new chief executive. The theme parks sector he previously oversaw is Disney’s economic engine, providing the majority of the company’s operating income in the last few years.
Outside a hall where Southern California Edison was celebrating Black History Month on Friday, a group of Altadena residents stood on the sidewalk, waving signs and talking of the homes and family members they lost in last year’s Eaton fire.
“They’re in there celebrating Black history and they’ve destroyed a Black town,” said Nicole Vasquez of My Tribe Rise, which helped organize the protest.
The Jan. 7, 2025 fire destroyed thousands of homes, including the majority of homes in west Altadena, a historically Black community. All but one of the 19 people who died were in west Altadena.
“If Edison’s tower did not ignite the fire, Altadena would still be there,” said Trevor Howard Kelley, who lost his 83-year-old mother, Erliene, in the fire.
Kelley, his daughter and two granddaughters had been living with his mother before her home was destroyed, he said.
The Black Altadena residents are part of a larger coalition that is asking Edison to advance each family who lost their home $200,000 in emergency housing assistance. They say that more than a year after the blaze many wildfire survivors are running out of the funds they had received from insurers.
The group protesting Friday also called for transparency from Edison. The company has said it believes it is likely its equipment caused the fire but has continued to deny it did anything wrong.
“We just want the truth,” said Felicia Ford, who lost her house in the fire. “What’s wrong with saying, ‘We got this wrong.’”
Scott Johnson, an Edison spokesperson, said Friday that the company continued to believe its voluntary compensation program was the best way to help victims of the fire. Edison has promised to quickly review each victim’s claim and pay it swiftly if approved.
Families who lost their homes can receive hundreds of thousands of dollars under the program, while those with damaged homes receive lesser amounts.
But many survivors say they don’t believe the offered amounts fully compensate their losses. And to receive the money, victims must agree not to sue — which many are not willing to do.
“We recognize the incredible struggles the community has faced,” Johnson said. “The intent of the program is to reach final settlements to allow the community to rebuild and move on.”
The investigation into the cause of the fire has not yet been released. Edison has said a leading theory is that its century-old transmission line in Eaton Canyon, which had not carried electricity for 50 years, somehow became reenergized and sparked the fire.
Company executives said they did not remove the old line because they believed it would be used in the future.
Tru Williams said he just wants to get his parents back home.
(Myung J. Chun / Los Angeles Times)
In December, state regulators ordered Edison to identify fire risks on its 355 miles of out-of service transmission lines located in areas of high fire risk and tell regulators how executives planned to use the lines in the future.
California may be losing two of the state’s most famed residents and generous political donors.
Filmmaker Steven Spielberg recently moved to New York and Facebook co-founder Mark Zuckerberg is eyeing purchasing a new property in Florida, stirring speculation about whether their decisions are tied to a proposed new tax on California billionaires to fund healthcare for the state’s most vulnerable residents.
Although a handful of prominent conservatives who bolted out of California noisily blamed their departure on the controversial wealth tax measure, as well as the state’s liberal ways and what they describe as cumbersome business regulations, neither Zuckerberg nor Spielberg has given any indication that the tax proposal is the reason for their moves.
A spokesperson for Spielberg, who has owned homes on both the East and West coasts since at least the mid-1990s, said the sole motivation for Spielberg and his wife, actor Kate Capshaw, decamping to Manhattan was to be near family.
“Steven’s move to the East Coast is both long-planned and driven purely by his and Kate Capshaw’s desire to be closer to their New York based children and grandchildren,” said Terry Press, a spokesperson for the prodigious filmmaker. She declined to answer questions about his position on the proposed ballot measure.
Director Steven Spielberg presents president Bill Clinton with the Ambassadors Humanity award at the 5th Annual Ambassadors for Humanity Dinner Honoring former President Bill Clinton to support the Survivors of the Shoah Visual History Foundation held at the Amblin theatre Universal Studios on February 17, 2005 in Los Angeles, California.
(Frazer Harrison / Getty Images)
On Jan. 1, Spielberg and Capshaw officially became residents of New York City, settling in the historic San Remo co-op in Central Park West. The storied building is among the most exclusive in Manhattan, having been home to Bono, Mick Jagger, Warren Beatty, Tiger Woods and many other celebrities. On the same day, Spielberg’s Amblin Entertainment opened an office in New York City.
Zuckerberg and his wife, pediatrician Priscilla Chan, are considering buying a $200-million waterfront mansion in South Florida, the Wall Street Journal first reported this month. The property is located in Miami’s Indian Creek, a gated barrier island that is an alcove of the wealthy and the influential, including Amazon founder Jeff Bezos and Trump’s daughter Ivanka and her husband, Jared Kushner.
Representatives for Zuckerberg declined to comment.
The billionaires’ moves raised eyebrows because they take place as supporters of the proposed 5% one-time tax on the assets of California billionaires and trusts are gathering signatures to qualify the initiative for the November ballot. Led by the Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West, they must gather the signatures of nearly 875,000 registered voters and submit them to county elections officials by June 24.
If approved, the tax would raise roughly $100 billion that would largely pay for healthcare services, as well as some education programs. Critics say it would drive the wealthy and their companies out of the state. On Dec. 31, venture capitalist David Sacks announced that he was opening an office in Austin, Texas, the same day PayPal co-founder Peter Thiel publicized that his firm had opened a new office in Miami.
The proposed ballot measure, if it qualifies for the ballot and is approved by voters, would apply to Californians who are residents of the state as of 2026. But residency requirements are murky. Among the factors considered by the state’s Franchise Tax Board are where someone is registered to vote, the location of their principle residence, how much time they spend in California, where their driver’s license was issued and their cars registered, where their spouse and children live, the location of their doctors, dentists, accountants and attorneys, and their “social ties,” such as the site of their house of worship or county club.
It’s unclear whether the proposal will qualify for the November ballot, and if it does, whether voters will approve it. However, a mass exodus of a number of the state’s billionaires — more than 200 people — would have a notable effect on state revenue, regardless. The state’s budget volatility is caused by its heavy reliance on taxes paid by the state’s wealthiest residents, including from levies on capital gains and stock-based compensation.
“The highest-income Californians pay the largest share of the state’s personal income tax,” according to Gov. Gavin Newsom’s 2026-27 budget summary that was published in January. “The significant share of personal income taxes — by far the state’s largest General Fund revenue source — paid by a small percentage of taxpayers increases the difficulty of forecasting personal income tax revenue.”
This reliance on wealthy Californians is among the reasons the proposed billionaires tax has created a schism among Democrats and is a source of discord in the 2026 governor’s race to replace Newsom, who cannot seek another term and is weighing a presidential bid. He opposes the proposal; Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT.) campaigned for it Wednesday evening at the Wiltern in Los Angeles.
“I am not only supportive of what they’re trying to do in California, but we’re going to introduce a wealth tax for the whole country. We have got to deal with the greed, the extraordinary greed, of the billionaire class,” Sanders told reporters Feb. 11.
Zuckerberg and Spielberg are both prolific political donors, though it is difficult to fully account for their contributions to candidates, campaigns and other entities because of how they or their affiliates donate to them as well as the intricacies of campaign finance reporting.
Spielberg, 79, a Hollywood legend, is worth more than $7 billion, according to Forbes. He and his wife have donated almost universally to Democratic candidates and causes, according to Open Secrets, a nonprofit, nonpartisan tracker of federal campaign contributions, and the California secretary of state’s office.
The prolific filmmaker, who won acclaim for movies such as “Schindler’s List,” “Jaws,” “Jurassic Park” and the “Indiana Jones” trilogy, was born in Ohio and lived with his family in several states before moving to California. He attended Cal State Long Beach but dropped out after Universal Studios gave him a contract to direct television shows.
Zuckerberg, 41, launched Facebook while in college and is worth more than $219 billion, making him among the world’s richest people, according to Forbes.
His largest personal federal political donation appears to be $1 million to FWD.us, a group focused on criminal justice and immigration reform nationwide, according to Open Secrets.
Zuckerberg, who is currently a registered Democrat in Santa Clara County, has donated to politicians across the partisan spectrum, including Democrats such as former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and current Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer to Republicans such as President Trump’s Secretary of State Marco Rubio when he ran for the White House and Chris Christie during his New Jersey gubernatorial campaign.
Both men’s personal donations don’t include their other effects on campaign finances — Spielberg has helped countless Democratic politicians raise money in Hollywood; Zuckerberg’s company has made other contributions. Meta — the parent company of Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp — donated $1 million to Trump’s inauguration committee in December 2024. Zuckerberg later attended the president’s swearing in at the U.S. Capitol Rotunda.
Zuckerberg, born in White Plains, N.Y., created an early prototype of Facebook while at Harvard University and dropped out to move to Silicon Valley to complete the social media platform, as depicted in the award-winning film “The Social Network.”
He still owns multiple properties in California and elsewhere, including a controversial, massive compound on Kauai that includes two mansions, dozens of bedrooms, multiple other buildings and recreational spaces — and an underground bunker that features a metal door filled with concrete, according to a 2023 investigation by Wired. The cost of land acquisition and construction reportedly has topped $300 million.
Meta is based in Menlo Park, Calif., though it has been incorporated in Delaware since Facebook’s founding in 2004.
Times staff writer Queenie Wong contributed to this report.
The Los Angeles County District Attorney is investigating whether Southern California Edison should be criminally prosecuted for its actions in last year’s devastating Eaton wildfire, which killed 19 people and left thousands of families homeless, the company said Wednesday.
Pedro Pizarro, chief executive of Edison International, told Wall Street analysts during an afternoon conference call that the company was cooperating with the District Attorney’s office. He said he didn’t know the magnitude of the investigation.
The company said in its annual 10-K report, which was released Wednesday, that it “could be subject to material fines, penalties, or restitution” if the investigation “determined that it failed to comply with applicable laws and regulations.”
“SCE is not aware of any basis for felony liability with regards to the Eaton Fire,” the report said. “Any fines and penalties incurred in connection with the Eaton Fire will not be recoverable from insurance, from the Wildfire Fund, or through electric rates.”
The District Attorney’s office declined to comment.
The investigation into the fire, which destroyed a wide swath of Altadena, has not yet been released. Pizarro has said that a leading theory of the fire’s cause is that a century-old transmission line in Eaton Canyon, which had not carried power for 50 years, somehow re-energized and sparked the fire.
Edison executives have said they didn’t remove the line because they believed it would be used in the future.
Company executives knew idle transmission lines could spark wildfires. In 2019, investigators traced the Kincade fire in Sonoma County, which destroyed 374 homes and other structures, to a transmission line owned by Pacific Gas & Electric that was no longer in service.
The Times reported in December how Edison fell behind in maintenance of its transmission system before the fire.
Despite the dangerous Santa Ana wind conditions on Jan. 7, 2025, Edison decided not to shut down the transmission lines running through Eaton Canyon. Pizarro has said the winds that night didn’t meet the company’s threshold at the time for turning off the lines.
Pizarro told investors on the call Wednesday that he continued to believe that the company had acted as a “reasonable utility operator” before the deadly fire.
Under state law, if a utility is determined to have acted reasonably it can be reimbursed for all or most of the damages of the fire by a state wildfire fund.
Connor Cipolla, an Eaton wildfire survivor, last year praised Southern California Edison’s plan of burying more than 60 miles of electric lines in Altadena as it rebuilds to reduce the risk of fire.
Then he learned he would have to pay $20,000 to $40,000 to connect his home, which was damaged by smoke and ash, to Edison’s new underground line. A nearby neighbor received an estimate for $30,000, he said.
“Residents are so angry,” Cipolla said. “We were completely blindsided.”
Other residents have tracked the wooden stakes Edison workers put up, showing where crews will dig. They’ve found dozens of places where deep trenches are planned under oak and pine trees that survived the fire. In addition to the added costs they face, they fear many trees will die as crews cut their roots.
“The damage is being done now and it’s irreversible,” homeowner Robert Steller said, pointing Maiden Lane to where an Edison crew was working.
For a week, Steller, who lost his home in the fire, parked his Toyota 4Runner over a recently dug trench. He said he was trying to block Edison’s crew from burying a large transformer between two towering deodar cedar trees. The work would “be downright fatal” to the decades-old trees, he said.
Altadena resident Robert Steller stands in front of his Toyota 4Runner that he parked strategically to prevent a Southern California Edison crew from digging too close to two towering cedar trees.
(Ronaldo Bolaños / Los Angeles Times)
The buried lines are an upgrade that will make Altadena’s electrical grid safer and more reliable, Edison says, and it also will lower the risk that the company would have to black out Altadena neighborhoods during dangerous Santa Ana winds to prevent fires.
Brandon Tolentino, an Edison vice president, said the company was trying to find government or charity funding to help homeowners pay to connect to the buried lines. In the meantime, he said, Edison decided to allow owners of homes that survived the fire to keep their overhead connections until financial help was available.
Tolentino added that the company planned meetings to listen to residents’ concerns, including about the trees. He said crews were trained to stop work when they find tree roots and switch from using a backhoe to digging by hand to protect them.
“We’re minimizing the impact on the trees as we [put lines] underground or do any work in Altadena,” he said.
Although placing cables underground is a fire prevention measure, consumer advocates point out it’s not the most cost-effective step Edison can take to reduce the risk.
Undergrounding electric wires can cost more than $6 million per mile, according to the state Public Utilities Commission, far more than building overhead wires.
Because utility shareholders put up part of the money needed to pay for burying the lines, the expensive work means they will earn more profit. Last year, the commission agreed Edison investors could earn an annual return of 10.03% on that money.
Edison said in April it would spend as much as $925 million to underground and rebuild its grid in Altadena and Malibu, where the Palisades fire caused devastation. That amount of construction spending will earn Edison and its shareholders more than $70 million in profit before taxes — an amount billed to electric customers — in the first year, according to calculations by Mark Ellis, the former chief economist for Sempra, the parent company of Southern California Gas and San Diego Gas & Electric.
That annual return will continue over the decades while slowly decreasing each year as the assets are depreciated, Ellis said.
“They’re making a nice profit on this,” he said.
Tolentino said the company wasn’t doing the work to profit.
“The primary reason for undergrounding is the wildfire mitigation,” he said. “Our focus is supporting the community as they rebuild.”
It’s unclear if the Eaton fire would have been less disastrous if Altadena’s neighborhood power lines had been buried. The blaze ignited under Edison’s towering transmission lines that run down the mountainside in Eaton Canyon. Those lines carry bulk power through Edison’s territory. The power lines being put underground are the smaller distribution lines, which carry power to homes.
A power line outside the home of Altadena resident Connor Cipolla.
(Ronaldo Bolanos/Los Angeles Times)
The investigation into the fire’s cause has not yet been released. Edison says a leading theory is that one of the Eaton Canyon transmission lines, which hadn’t carried power for 50 years, might have briefly reenergized, sparking the blaze. The fire killed 19 people and destroyed more than 9,000 homes, businesses and other structures.
Edison said it has no plans to bury those transmission lines.
The high cost of undergrounding has become a contentious issue in Sacramento because, under state rules, most or all of it is billed to all customers of the utility.
Before the Eaton fire, Edison won praise from consumer advocates by installing insulated overhead wires that sharply cut the risk of the lines sparking a fire for a fraction of the cost. Since 2019, the company has installed more than 6,800 miles of the insulated wires.
“A dollar spent reconductoring with covered conductor provides … over four times as much value in wildfire risk mitigation as a dollar spent on underground conversion,” Edison said in testimony before the utilities commission in 2018.
By comparison, Pacific Gas & Electric has relied more on undergrounding its lines to reduce the risk of fire, pushing up customer utility bills. Now Edison has shifted to follow PG&E’s example.
Mark Toney, executive director of the the Utility Reform Network, a consumer group in San Francisco, said his staff estimates Edison spends $4 million per mile to underground wires compared with $800,000 per mile for installing insulated lines.
By burying more lines, customer bills and Edison’s profits could soar, Toney said.
“Five times the cost is equal to five times the profit,” he said.
Last spring, Pedro Pizarro, chief executive of Edison International, told Gov. Gavin Newsom about the company’s undergrounding plans in a letter. Pizarro wrote that rules at the utility commission would require Altadena and Malibu homeowners to pay to underground the electric wire from their property line to the panel on their house. He estimated it would cost $8,000 to $10,000 for each home.
Residents who need to dig long trenches may pay far more than that, said Cipolla, who is a member of the Altadena Town Council.
An oak tree stands tall in an area impacted by the Eaton fires. Homeowners worry such trees could be at risk in the undergrounding work.
(Ronaldo Bolanos/Los Angeles Times)
Last week, Cipolla showed a reporter the electrical panel on the back of his house, which is many yards away from where he needs to connect to Edison’s line. The company also initially wanted him to dig up the driveway he poured seven years ago, he said. Edison later agreed to a location that avoids the driveway.
Tolentino said Edison’s crews were working with homeowners concerned about the company’s planned locations for the buried lines.
“We understand it is a big cost and we’re looking at different sources to help them,” he said.
At the same time, some residents are fuming that, despite the undergrounding work, most of the town’s neighborhoods still will have overhead telecommunications lines. In other areas of the state, the telecommunications companies have worked with the electric utilities to bury all the lines, eliminating the visual clutter.
So far, the telecom companies have agreed to underground only a fraction of their lines in Altadena, Tolentino said.
Cipolla said Edison executives told him they eventually plan to chop off the top of new utility poles the company installed after the fire, leaving the lower portion that holds the telecom lines.
“There is no beautification aspect to it whatsoever,” Cipolla said.
As for the trees, Steller and other residents are asking Edison to adjust its construction map to avoid digging near those that remain after the fire. Altadena lost more than half of its tree cover in the blaze and as crews cleared lots of debris.
1
2
3
1.A pedestrian walks past Christmas Tree lane in Altadena. Christmas Tree Lane was officially listed in the National Register of Historic Places in 1990.2.A “We Love Altadena” sign hangs from a shrub on Christmas Tree Lane.3.Parts of a chopped down tree rest on a street curb in Altadena.
Wynne Wilson, a fire survivor and co-founder of Altadena Green, pointed out that the lot across the street from the giant cedar trees on Maiden Lane has no vegetation, making it a better place for Edison’s transformer.
“This is needless,” Wilson said. “People are dealing with so much. Is Edison thinking we won’t fight over this?”
Carolyn Hove, raising her voice to be heard over the crew operating a jackhammer in front of her home, asked: “How much more are we supposed to go through?”
Hove said she doesn’t blame the crews of subcontractors the utility hired, but Edison’s management.
“It’s bad enough our community was decimated by a fire Edison started,” she said. “We’re still very traumatized, and then to have this happen.”
Warner Bros. Discovery is cracking open the door to allow spurned bidder, Paramount Skydance, to make its case — but Warner’s board still maintains its preference for Netflix’s competing proposal.
Warner’s move to reopen talks comes after weeks of pressure from Paramount, which submitted an enhanced offer to buy Warner last week. Paramount’s willingness to increase its offer late in the auction attracted the attention of some Warner investors.
On Tuesday, Warner Bros. Discovery responded with a letter to Paramount Chairman David Ellison and others on Paramount’s board, giving the group seven days to “clarify your proposal.”
“We seek your best and final proposal,” Warner board members wrote. Warner set a Feb. 23 deadline for Paramount to comply.
The closely watched sale of the century-old Warner Bros., known for “Batman,” “The Big Bang Theory,” “Casablanca,” and HBO, the home of “Game of Thrones” and “Succession,” is expected to reshape Hollywood.
The flurry of activity comes as Warner Bros. Discovery and Netflix are seeking to enter the home stretch of the auction. Warner separately issued its proxy and set a special March 20 meeting of its shareholders to decide the company’s fate.
Warner Bros. Discovery is recommending that its stockholders approve the $82.7-billion Netflix deal.
“We continue to believe the Netflix merger is in the best interests of WBD shareholders due to the tremendous value it provides, our clear path to achieve regulatory approval and the transaction’s protections for shareholders against downside risk,” Warner Chairman Samuel A. Di Piazza, Jr., said in a Tuesday statement.
Still, the maneuver essentially reopens the talks.
Warner Bros. is creating an opportunity for Paramount to sway Warner board members, which could perhaps prompt Netflix to raise its $27.75 a share offer for Warner’s Burbank-based studios, vast library of programming, HBO and streaming service HBO Max.
Netflix is not interested in buying Warner Bros. Discovery’s basic cable channels, including CNN, TBS, HGTV and Animal Planet, which are set to be spun off to a stand-alone company later this year.
In contrast, Paramount wants to buy the entire company and has offered more than $30 a share.
Last week, Paramount sweetened its bid for Warner, adding a $2.8-billion “break fee” that Warner would have to pay Netflix if the company pulled the plug on that deal. Paramount also said it would pay Warner investors a “ticking fee” of 25 cents a share for every quarter after Jan. 1 that the deal does not close.
“While we have tried to be as constructive as possible in formulating these solutions, several of these items would benefit from collaborative discussion to finalize,” Paramount said last week as it angled for a chance to make its case. “We will work with you to refine these solutions to ensure they address any and all of your concerns.”
Netflix agreed to give Warner Bros. Discovery a temporary waiver from its merger agreement to allow Warner Bros. Discovery to reengage with Paramount, which lost the bidding war on Dec. 4.
“We granted WBD a narrow seven-day waiver of certain obligations under our merger agreement to allow them to engage with PSKY to fully and finally resolve this matter,” Netflix said Tuesday in a statement. “This does not change the fact that we have the only signed, board-recommended agreement with WBD, and ours is the only certain path to delivering value to WBD’s stockholders.”
Netflix has matching rights for any improved Paramount offer. The company renewed its confidence in its deal and its prospect to win regulatory approval.
“PSKY has repeatedly mischaracterized the regulatory review process by suggesting its proposal will sail through, misleading WBD stockholders about the real risk of their regulatory challenges around the world,” Netflix said in its statement. “WBD stockholders should not be misled into thinking that PSKY has an easier or faster path to regulatory approval – it does not.”
Warner Bros. Discovery acknowledged that Paramount’s recent modification “addresses some of the concerns that WBD had identified several months ago,” according to the letter to Paramount.
But Warner Bros. Discovery added Paramount’s offer “still contains many of the unfavorable terms and conditions that were in the draft agreements … and twice unanimously rejected by our Board,” Warner Bros. Discovery said.
Warner’s board told Paramount it will “welcome the opportunity to engage” during the seven-day negotiation period.
Paramount has been pursuing the prized assets since last September.
“Every step of the way, we have provided PSKY with clear direction on the deficiencies in their offers and opportunities to address them,” Warner Chief Executive David Zaslav said in a statement. “We are engaging with PSKY now to determine whether they can deliver an actionable, binding proposal that provides superior value and certainty for WBD shareholders.”
The world’s largest shipping company MSC has been moving goods to and from illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank and Syria’s occupied Golan Heights, with the help of European port operators.
