Jump to content

Reynolds Woodcock

Burnt Ends
  • Posts

    2856
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

5991 Surly 10%

About Reynolds Woodcock

Recent Profile Visitors

7092 profile views
  1. I'm not sure I agree with that, although I agree that neither is a great outcome. For the average consumer, this is probably going to be a great deal. The average consumer doesn't care about craft or quality or experience. The average consumer cares about convenience. Sit on couch, turn on screen, screen output shiny content, scroll on smaller screen. The end. This deal will *without question* result in more of that. There is a smaller set of consumers that cares about both the quality of movies and the quality of the method by which movies are consumed. This deal is certainly a disaster for the latter, and probably very bad for the former.
  2. I wouldn’t really categorize either in that manner. More detail for anyone who cares. Netflix presents (in my estimation) a greater regulatory risk than the other bidders (who themselves are not free from risk). Netflix could have agreed to do everything under the sun to get the deal cleared (so called "hell or high water" obligations). Instead, they agreed to a more measured standard. They are required to litigate against the government to close the deal, and they are required to accept government-imposed divestiture requirements for the WBD business unless doing so would be extremely bad for the business (in plain english). Importantly, they are not required to divest Netflix's other businesses. So, you can think of the $5.8 bln break fee as compensating WBD for taking this level of regulatory risk. Separately, WBD has to shut down their auction, but they can still terminate the deal if they get an unsolicited superior proposal from someone. Very unlikely since they ran a very public process, but if that happened, they would have to pay Netflix a $2.8 billion break fee.
  3. You, in the future (man)
  4. The answer is yes, eventually. It’s a battle for eyeballs, and the more you give the consumer the opportunity to switch apps, the more you give them the opportunity to switch to another corporation’s app. you will be paying $80 for a Netflix/HBO streaming package, and your choice for theatrical and physical media will dwindle.
  5. Certainly better if you enjoy not having movies in theaters and paying Netflix $80 a month.
  6. As somewhat expected, Netflix won the auction and signed the deal overnight. From a quick scan of the merger agreement, looks like WBD will complete the spin of its linear networks to its shareholders, and Netflix will acquire the remaining business for about $72 bil of equity value. The most interesting part is what happens from a governmental approvals perspective. Lobbying from Paramount and others will be intense. Even ignoring the wild card in the White House, this transaction would receive heavy antitrust scrutiny. With the wild card in the White House, all bets are off. I honestly can't remember if Netflix has done something to aggrieve this president in the past, which will be the main sticking point. I didn't parse every word, but looks like Netflix will owe a $5.8 bil break fee if the deal fails for regulatory reasons.
  7. He’ll be a lifetime longhorn to me for being on the field against Bama in 23 (I believe it was a swing pass to him on our first offensive play, iirc). Aggie af, but after late Mack, Chuckles and dipshit, hard to express how much that game meant to me.
  8. Just saw Kill Bill The Whole Bloody Affair in 70mm. A great way to spend 4 hours. Took me back to high school.
  9. I’d say this wouldn’t register as a blip on the weird radar compared to the pre-NIL days.
  10. He’s a redshirt freshman who early enrolled.
  11. But remember, shooting fireworks off after July 4 is A-OK #personalresponsibility
  12. First of all, I was responding to your statement that "There’s not a lot of hard evidence that the OSU loss is really hurting Texas here and quite a bit of counter evidence that it isn’t". So now you are moving the goal post to "the case is not near as clear-cut as people are making it out to be. It basically hinges on the committee choosing to reward H2H vs OU abd that is not at all a sure proposition." Sure, I concede it is certainly possible the committee would decide to eschew head to head and rank Texas below both OU and Alabama in that scenario. It is much more likely in the scenario you describe that they slot those teams Texas - OU - Alabama (just as they've slotted OU over Alabama), with Alabama having a chance to leap frog both with a second win over Georgia. But the idea the OSU loss is not "really hurting Texas" is just false.
  13. I've always assumed that handle belonged to Ian Boyd.
  14. This has been discussed (and disproven) ad nauseam. It's not about who Texas lost to, it's the fact that there is a 3 in the loss column. There is no reason for Texas to be ranked below OU, Alabama, Notre Dame, or Miami, for example, other than the number 3. A win against any one of Florida, Ohio St or Georgia, and Texas is in. It's fine if that is is the criteria, it is what it is. But coaches and athletic directors probably shouldn't proactively increase their odds of suffering additional losses.
×
×
  • Create New...