Thursday, a trio of Hollywood Reporter The staff members attended a presentation of the new owner of Paramount, David Ellison, who sat alongside his investors of Redbird Capital and new managers of the Manhattan headquarters of his company to explain his vision of the besieged media company.
Ellison & Co. had just spent some $ 8 billion for the 113 -year -old studio and had hopes – really, a need – to transform it into a more equipped technological business to manage the realities of the 2020s. Shortly after the end of the meeting, the THR Journalists debreed on what they had just heard (and did not hear) of the incoming property.
Steven Zeitchik: So I must admit that I entered the event by having the impression that it was going to be more or more of the same thing – finding efficiency gains, unlocking the value of shareholders, all this Lingo of MBA follows – and I was pleasantly surprised to hear a plan that makes sense: to combine the Ellison Tech -SAVVY (and money) with all these paramount properties.
Alex Weprin: It seems that they have a vision. That they can execute, it is a whole other question. But I left by thinking that it is not only a game of pure vanity where they buy it and they do not know what they are going to do with it. They really think that technology can change the entertainment industry, even if they were not as coming as they could have been.
Sz: A vision and also the advantages that no one else has. Like Google-Youtube and Netflix do not have the library or paramount history, and of course, most of the other inherited companies do not have the know-how in their owner. They might say that they now have both in a way that no business has before.
AW: It is true, unless you look at Nielsen Gauge, YouTube adds a share of audience on television and they are a company of pure technology. So you don’t need to be an inherited television business. But perhaps there is room for an entertainment company to come and say that we can also build a technological product, a kind of pipeline adapted to consumers and make people look more at your belongings, anything, which can compete with YouTube and Netflix, which are a level above when it comes to succeeding consumers.
Sz: Totally. I felt like it was the real frustration to speak to their team yesterday, as if we spend all this money to produce Matlock And then we only receive a spectator for an hour per week while YouTube spends much less and they have them five hours a day. Erik, tell me if I’m too gullible here. Have something they say convinced you?
Erik Hayden: One thing that was struck with me is how Ellison said that I do this for the next 20 years. Obviously, this is a hyperbole, but the Exc team also said that it was the first family from Walt Disney to put a lot of their own money in a business. They are formed as a infusion in Hollywood rather than an extractor. They also supervised the company as a long -term game. The problem is that David Ellison is now the CEO of a public company and that he will have to react to the quarterly profits and the class of investors, and will hear a lot of “are they large enough to compete with Netflix” and all the stories that we hear daily.
SZ: Yes, and these analysts do not care what Ol ‘Walt has done, but roughly the company. And certainly all these inherited cables or even CBS are things that do not excite them. So it’s a bit like Warner Bros. Discovery where Wall Street could just want cuts and a sale of fire. The difference is that these guys can be too rich to worry about it. As seriously, it is important to them at this level.
AW: You know, I don’t think David Ellison or even the new CEO Jeff Shell need to hit their bonus numbers as David Zas.
Sz: I think David Ellison obtained the bonus that had when he was 18 years old.
AW: It is actually a significant thing; Their remuneration packages are lower at the start. Wages are online, but their target bonuses are 1.5 million dollars. Which is really lower than the average in the industry. So, I really don’t think they have the reason to hit the numbers in a quarter like the other executives. Redbird wants to see return but Ellison is in a different position.
Eh: I wonder if it would work better if they became private.
AW: Given the property they have, that would probably not take much. Maybe something they think about the whole line.
Sz: In the meantime, let’s not forget that they will also cut, which Wall Street still likes. They said about it yesterday. Jeff Shell was asked what was most excited and he literally said efficiency. I could almost feel everyone on the back panel. It’s like guy, we are all talking about great vision and then he is like, yeah, I will get this Redstone Greeting right away here.
Eh: And the only detail they gave on the cup was that they would not do it a quarter per quarter, and it will not be the death of 1,000 cuts as we saw with Warner Bros Discovery. It was right, see the call for the results of November 6 for more.
AW: I think there will be a large, large and dramatic reorganization. They will talk about it in November, then it will happen very quickly afterwards.
SZ: What do we think that the company looks like when all this is done-maybe just a movie studio and then whatever the paramount + swollen? And CBS, for the moment.
Eh: It seems that it is how it will be. Ellison seems to see him as essential images … and everything else.
AW: I suppose that the only reason I would repeat is that no one would say that a movie studio is a growth company. You may be able to add more movies to the slate because they have released so few films in the past two years. But theater is not a global growth company.
Eh: Maybe then a big IP – Top Gun, Terminator, Star Trek. Wherever he is monetized.
Sz: And film franchises can still bring the dollars. I mean they have done $ 1.2 billion just in the past two years just on Mission: Impossible movies. Split with theaters, of course, but still. And you have the sense of Ellison likes to get a Top gun-The types hit the kitchen. He also seems to really want to correct Paramount + – that people also forget that 80 million subscribers.
Eh: And also had the two most watched original shows of the year with Taylor Sheridan Man And 1923with Mobland At n ° 4, according to the luminate count.
Sz: The question is algorithm, can they do it very close to Netflix, where they simply recommend things that keep you on the platform.
AW: It will be interesting when Cindy Holland undertakes next week in Los Angeles in the studio on their plans. It comes from Netflix and they are the masters to keep people hanging.
SZ: You have the sense of Ellison really wants to own it, distribution. The Exec team has suggested that when the emissions do better on YouTube than they do on a platform possessed and exploited, it is a loss. It’s really about keeping it closely on P +.
AW: They earn much more money when they distribute. It was “the content is king”, but it turns into “distribution is king”.
Eh: And they have a decent brand to do this, despite everything. Everyone knows what a paramount + spectacle now – the action, the brand Solid Middle America, Sheridan -Esque Premium. You can build there.
Sz: Speaking, well, whatever the opposite of construction, we must mention CBS News. As at this stage, they just want it to disappear.
Eh: I thought it was funny Ellison kept saying that we remain non -political. I did not have the impression that he wants to be an operator of the media.
AW: Like many companies, I think they consider the division of news as more painful pain.
Sz: Which makes Bari Weiss and everything The free press Strange rumors. Does he really covet it?
Eh: I thought when asked yesterday about The free press It was interesting that he did not say “Oh, we really like what he does”, that is what someone can generally say apart from a “we do not start rumors and speculation”. He just said something like “I took 50 meetings in Sun Valley and it was one of them.”
Sz: Yes, it may be a storm in a teapot. It could be more interesting to look at what he could do with influencers. He wants Youtube-y cheap content, there is a lot of political content there. DC Draino on the one hand, Meidas Touch or Hasan Piker on the other, Boom, you have your consumption time. That you have your time for good for democracy, I don’t know. But you have your hours.
AW: I would not be surprised if his news strategy was motivated by, you know, people more opinion. Because the funniest thing is that they talk a lot about being dedicated to the truth, but I think that in the media environment today, the truth is simply not so precious.
Sz: A slogan for capitalism at an advanced stadium.
AW: But I mean it’s true. If he looks at what he can monetize, there are a lot of opinion voice on the content creator side.
SZ:. Okay, if we are talking about influencers, we must approach this other elephant in the room: Tiktok. If Larry Ellison buys him and he align himself in a way with Paramount, it changes the situation for the young Ellison, right? Now they have these crazy algorithms and millions of users and they can really get out.
Eh: I’m just …
Sz: Do not feel it?
Eh: I just don’t know that companies have something to do with each other.
Sz: Fair. But this is where AI and personalization come into play. Ellison was talking about the way he wanted it, so very soon – obviously, technology is not there yet, but when it is – you can have a conversation with your favorite character. It would be the brass ring for him, right? Tiktok with sponge?
AW: I think if they buy tiktok, it’s a Gamechanger. They become a mastodon that can challenge YouTube and Netflix.
Sz: It must be, right? No one in history has never owned so many inherited media and social power. Well, Rupert did with MySpace, but let’s not talk about that.
AW: I really feel like it would change everything.
Sz: What if he doesn’t? How is the ceiling here? Stay alive?
AW: I think there is ample space to change the business – you do a better job at the movie studio and a better job at the television studio and better work in streaming, you could have a universal level business.
Sz: And a Disney level company?
AW: I wouldn’t go so far.
