Mouse eats Fox

Eloise posted:

So Disney is buying (much of) 21st Century Fox at a cost of $66bn.

Good thing or bad?  Should it smooth the way to Fox buying the rest of Sky, or does it not matter who ultimately owned Fox its still too much (UK) media power in the control of one foreign entity?

Could be interesting in the realms of film making with Disney taking control of X-Men and Fantastic Four along side their control of Marvel Studios - only Spiderman (of significance) is outside their full control and they are already working with Sony.  Also gives Disney control over the distribution rights to the earlier Star Wars movies - chance of the original cut coming on bluray perhaps?

Murdoch isn't however giving up Fox News.  But the sale should allay fears of Sky News turning into Fox News UK.

I had hoped that Murdoch wouldn't dare attempt to turn Sky News into Fox News UK, but I guess that isn't going to happen now. I would be astonished were Fox News allowed to purchase any part of Sky 

I had also wondered why Fox News was removed from its slot on Sky TV in August. Sky claimed that it was simply because of low audience figures, but I suspect that it was felt that the controversial nature of the channel and its blatant propagandist content would be seen to be an obstacle to the sale of Sky to Fox. No idea what the impact of Disney/Fox purchasing Sky might be, but it certainly won't be as bad as Rupert Murdoch gaining any meaningful control.

I've come across some very amusing posts from 'far right' Sky subscribers who intent to cancel their Sky subscriptions because Fox News has gone whilst the 'fake' CNN and BBC News channels have been retained. Wonderful!   

On a personal level, I'm a little sorry that Fox News has been removed from Sky. I used to watch bits of it occasionally just because it is so unbelievably awful and transparent in respect of its propaganda. It was also a pretty good alternative to medication for low blood pressure from time to time. 

Good news all round, I'd say.

This is very interesting (I have been writing about it all afternoon for a media analyst). Murdoch is the most famous media mogul in the world, with a multi-billion dollar empire, but in the scheme of things, he is a minnow, and he and his sons probably realise that they cannot compete with the likes of Amazon, Google, Netflix, Disney(!) and Apple in the entertainment stakes.

So they are retrenching into old Rupe's first love, newspapers and news products like Fox News, the WSJ and print stuff - where they can be a big player, especially if he uses the cash from selling 21st C Fox to buy Time Inc (as many have suspected he might).

As for the ownership of Sky, that's probably all moot until OfCom makes its decision in January, but I suspect the Murdochs will give up their bid.

Kevin-W posted:

As for the ownership of Sky, that's probably all moot until OfCom makes its decision in January, but I suspect the Murdochs will give up their bid.

As I understand it, it was Fox who was bidding to take full ownership of Sky and that deal is still on the table even though Sky is now owned (ultimately) by Disney rather than being owned by Murdoch.  So OfCom will now be ruling if Disney is a fit and proper owner.

The question now is ... what did Mickey get Daisy to do in exchange for Donald getting the gig? 

Eloise posted:

taking control of X-Men and Fantastic Four

Do you really care?

Gianluigi Mazzorana posted:

Eloise posted:

taking control of X-Men and Fantastic Four

Do you really care?

As I love movies ... potentially yes.  

Disney have control of two big franchises which have been “artistic” as well as commercial successes so to add to and build on these is something many movie goers care about.

Kevin’s post pretty much nails it. Netflix, Amazon and Google are the leaders, but Apple is ramping up spend from $1B to $4B+ by 2022. The Disney/Fox merger will enable them to compete more effectively both with proprietary content and streaming services (both new, and through more favorable terms for Hulu). 

But none of this M&A is good for consumers. The days of Amazon or Netflix as an affordable, one-stop shop aggregator look like they are coming to an end. To see a majority of the content, one will either have to subscribe to multiple services, pay higher for premium channels within a given service, or pay exorbitant on-demand fees for individual movies or shows.

In the US, the end of net neutrality will mean that carriers (Comcast, Spectrum, Verizon, etc.) can soon charge content providers higher prices for high bandwidth streaming media. These costs will also be passed on to the consumer. Will Netflix lose customers by going from $11 to $20 per month?  We'll see...

Love the thread title - brilliant!

Huge posted:

Love the thread title - brilliant!

Similarly, I like your new avatar, Huge. Witty and contemporary.

Huge posted:

Love the thread title - brilliant!

Thanks.

On the original topic... it appears not to be a done deal as DoJ is investigating.