Report: Comcast Considering Merger With ViacomCBS To Create Mega-Streamer

Following speculation by industry analysts, a new report indicates that media giant Comcast is considering making a bid for ViacomCBS to shore up its streaming strategy. While at the same time, ViacomCBS is making some internal moves to prioritize streaming at Paramount+, home of the Star Trek Universe on TV.

Comcast CEO looking at ViacomCBS in bid to become streaming giant

Comcast may be the third-largest media company in the world (trailing Netflix and Disney), but the 2020 launch of Peacock has failed to put it into the big leagues in terms of streaming. Today, the Wall Street Journal reports that CEO Brian Roberts wants to change that and is considering a number of options, including mergers and acquisitions. According to WSJ sources, Roberts is considering bids for Roku and ViacomCBS as possibilities. The stocks of all three companies jumped today due to the report.

As we reported last month, media analysts see more big deals coming following the AT&T deal to merge Warner Media with Discovery and Amazon’s acquisition of MGM. Bringing ViacomCBS and its Paramount+ service into Comcast “would make Comcast a contender for the No. 3 spot in the streaming industry, behind Netflix and Disney,” according to Bloomberg Intelligence analysts.

In addition to bringing together Peacock and Paramount+, a merger would also potentially combine Universal Pictures and Paramount Pictures, with all the entities having more resources available. These kinds of moves would likely have an impact on the Star Trek franchise both on Paramount+ and in terms of theatrical releases. Although any deal bringing ViacomCBS into the same entity as NBCUniversal would create regulatory challenges and likely require some assets to be spun off.

For now, it’s just speculation, but Wall Street is taking it seriously. While the re-merger of Viacom and CBS did bring some more scale, the company is still dwarfed by the likes of Comcast. With the market clearly indicating bigger is better when it comes to media companies and streaming, even if nothing happens with Comcast, it’s likely some kind of deal is in ViacomCBS’ future.

ViacomCBS restructures for streaming

In our last business brief, we reported that Julie McNamara – who had overseen programming for CBS All Access since the beginning – had left ViacomCBS. Today, ViacomCBS announced a restructuring, including making changes within its executive ranks. According to The Hollywood Reporter, the moves are “in a bid to better prioritize streaming.”

In a memo to staff ViacomCBS CEO Bob Bakish said:

“The strong launch and early months of Paramount+ have demonstrated the power and potential of our platform, as well as audiences’ appetite for a broad and diverse array of content, all in one place. The moves we are making today will accelerate that mission by putting ViacomCBS’ most powerful assets — world-class content, iconic brands, global infrastructure and expertise, and the best talent in the business today — behind our platforms as we pursue the global opportunity in streaming. Together, our leaders will ensure that we’re delivering to audiences the very best our streaming platforms have to offer, with must-watch content across every genre and market we operate in.”

The restructuring creates focused groupings, each headed by an executive with the power to greenlight projects for Paramount+. Showtime CEO David Nevins is taking on the new role of Chief Content Officer for Scripted Originals at Paramount+. He will continue to report directly to ViacomCBS CEO Bob Bakish. This puts Nevins in charge of the future of the Star Trek Universe shows on Paramount+.

There is no indication currently that there are any planned changes for the Star Trek Universe, with five Star Trek shows continuing to be in production, including two new shows: Star Trek: Prodigy coming this year and Star Trek: Strange New Worlds coming in 2022. But new management can always create changes, as Noah Hawley learned last year when Paramount’s new head of motion pictures halted his Star Trek film shortly before production. And speaking of movies, THR also reports that Paramount Pictures will be adding a content chief to oversee movies for Paramount+, who in theory would also have the power to greenlight a Star Trek movie made exclusively for streaming.


Keep up with all the ViacomCBS corporate news at TrekMovie.com.

Subscribe
Notify me of
71 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

I certainly hope not. Comcast would be an awful owner to be beholden to and thousands of jobs would be lost.

Agreed. As a Comcast Xfinity customer, I call nonsense on that. It’s fully understood that a full merger between two media companies would have been illegal under the Federal Communications Commission rules prohibiting a merger between any of two of the four major American broadcast networks.

Last edited 1 month ago by DonDonP1

They could probably argue that broadcast isn’t that important these days.

They could probably argue that broadcast isn’t that important these days.

They’d be wrong.

From the Hollywood Reporter, June 17, 2021:

Per a measurement of different platforms Nielsen is calling “The Gauge,” streaming made up 26 percent of total TV usage in May, to 25 percent for over-the-air networks. Cable has the largest slice of the TV-viewing pie, with 39 percent of total usage in May. Other activities on TV sets, including gaming and playback of physical media, make up the rest of the total.

They would also certainly be accused of marginalizing the poorer, more rural populations that still lag in modern entertainment options.

Interesting! Thanks.

yeah, but when Disney bought Fox, they had to do the same thing in regards to broadcast networks because Disney already owned ABC. I think they spun the Fox network into its own thing to avoid the FCC regulations. Cumcast could theoretically do something similar if they bought CBS since they already own NBC.

I would rather see Apple swoop in than watch Paramount and CBS dismantled and spun off, respectively.

Yes, I imagine that would split the Star Trek properties into movie (Paramount spin-off owned) and TV (CBS spin-off owned). I like having them in the same tent.

Disney has nothing to do with Fox Noise. They only bought the entertainment division and the studios + the library. The network, and all the sports are still owned by Murdoch. 20th Century Studios (the new division under Disney) produces programs for the networks, of which Fox is one.

There you go. If Comcast does buy ViacomCBS, then the FCC may approve that on the condition of spinning off NBCUniversal and Britain’s Sky Group.

Last edited 1 month ago by DonDonP1

Fox Network is owned by The Murdoch’s and not Disney. Disney bought their studios and renamed it and own all of the IP. So there wasn’t much that has to be done their. The original owners of Fox still own the broadcast network and Disney still owns ABC

CBS and NBC would be a major issue. Something would likely have to be spun off.

They could take a page from the Disney-Fox “merger.” That would have merged ABC and FOX broadcast, except Disney left FOX broadcast behind. They didn’t want any broadcast/cable stuff, just the stuff good for streaming and theatrical releases. That’s where the action is now.

Comcast and Viacom could similarly spin off their streaming/theatrical capabilities into a new separate company and keep cable/broadcast stuff behind, where it can continue to circle the drain and eventually vanish.

Please Comcast should never buy ViacomCBS Verizon should be the one to buy ViacomCBS and rename it CBSParamount

Shari Redstone apparently had talks with them some years ago. I don’t know that they’d be any better than AT&T has been for WarnerMedia, and the latter’s failures are probably giving them cold feet about jumping into this market now.

ViacomCBS and Discovery would have been a solid combo. Now it’s really just smaller fry like Lionsgate and AMC Networks up for grabs if ViacomCBS wants to be a buyer. I’m sure there are some out of the box opportunities like PlutoTV was out there, but a bug reason they are an acquisition target is that most of the other smaller and medium sized companies with diverse assets, juicy media libraries and good IP are spoken for now.

Oh no. Bad, very bad idea. Not also ’jobs, Star Trek. I got a bad feeling about this.

With The Amazon / MGM deal already under scrutiny by the FTC, a merger involving ViacomCBS and Comcast would be a tough sell. Parts of one or both companies would have to be sold off, the first of which would have to be one of the broadcast networks.

Comcast wants a bigger piece of the streaming pie but ViacomCBS probably isn’t the most viable option to get there.

Sony is the only major studio without a network. They could sell CBS to it and Comcast would keep all the content, like Star Trek. Warners could take 100% of the CW.

Plus, Sony would then have Columbia Pictures, CBS Records, and CBS. 😀

Yuck.

Hey, I’m just the messenger. Antitrust is kind of a dead letter.

Until it isn’t.

People said the same before the IBM break-up and then again before the ATT one.

It’s interesting, but the next generation of industrial organization economists who built the cases for the break-ups seem to be mobilizing their evidence again in the tech and communications sector.

It will be interesting.

Good point.

I legitimately look forward to hearing Anthony talk about this on the podcast.

Same. Tony, please go super inside baseball on this stuff!!!

In addition to many other things, I REALLY hope Comcast doesn’t buy Roku. I really really feel like it’s important that Roku remains non-partisan.

Man these mergers are getting crazier and crazier aren’t they? I think Disney is the one at fault for this because once they bought 20th Century Fox to give Disney+ more content, it opened the flood gates for everyone else since.

If this happens, does this mean we’ll be calling this service yet ANOTHER name lol. Maybe it will be called ViacomCAST+Paramount! It may not roll off the tongue now but give it a year.

It is kind of ridiculous that the copyrights holders have created a situation where companies feel like they need to buy up everything in order to be able to have a dependable streaming platform.

Nooooooo! Please god no. Comcast is the root of all things evil. I’ve been paying for CBSAA (now Paramount) since Discovery began. If Comcast buys them, I will stop paying. They will never see a red cent from me.

Of course you’d stop paying if Comcast buys them, CBSAA (now Paramount) will cease to exist. Comcast will just roll you over to 1 of their other streams or bundles which will carry their Paramount content. At which point, I believe the words for which you are looking are, “I’ll opt out of their free trial period!”

argh. I’m about 9 months away from being free from Comcast. As soon as my contract is up, I’m going to switch to a new fiber provider in my neighborhood.

Being a child of the 1950s, for most of my life such a merger would represent the skeevy elements of the NBC executive suites joining forces with the Paleyites, and STAR TREK returning home to roost in that, which would make my skin crawl. But assuming #METOO finally and definitively purged those elements, I suppose there is a certain poetic symmetry to STAR TREK returning to NBC and THE UNIVERSAL STUDIOS TOURS?

I mean I guess it’d be cool to have Star Trek back at NBC. But would you also want CBS and NBC to be merged? I don’t.

I just hope anti-trust laws stop it from happening

Heck no. Paramount would get decimated, jobs would be lost, Star Trek would play second fiddle to the likes of Jurassic Park, a weakened CBS would get spun-off and snatched up by someone else like Verizon. You’d get Star Trek rides at Universal Studios and anyone with Peacock and Paramount+ would see their bill shrink. Whoop dee doo.

If ViacomCBS can’t or won’t fend off a merger where it is the party being absorbed, then I’d like it to be an arrangement where the parent company doesn’t have competing interests already and a semblance of independence can remain. That made Gulf + Western and Sony et al more palatable corporate overlords for Hollywood companies than the likes of Disney, AT&T and Comcast who either have designs on consolidation or using Hollywood assets to sell more phone, internet or cable plans. Just look at the creative upheaval AT&T caused HBO.

But think of all the awesome crossover opportunities!

Jurassic Trek
The Fast and the Federation
The Klingon Purge
How to Train Your Vulcan
Kung Fu Picard

We’ve already had The Fast and The Furious in space. It was Star Trek: Beyond.

I don’t want NBC and CBS to be merged, either.

CBS or NBC would have to be spun off into its own corporate entity the same way the Fox TV Network was split of from 20th Century Fox when Disney gobbled-up bought the studio.

Yep. And I don’t quite know how that could even work. CBS needs to be able to bankroll its own slate of series as well as multi-billion dollar sports deals. If it is cut loose, it would suddenly go from top dog to being at a disadvantage compared to the other networks who have deep pockets to help their pipelines. Fox got hobbled, but it is still backed by News Corp.

I assume all the work done to merge CBS and Viacom back together would essentially be undone as the broadcast aspects would get pulled out and cobbled together again, but likely fleeced of any ownership of valuable IP like Trek.

Former Comcast Customer. Not coming back. These people were imposing a home Internet data cap. Not cool. They also have higher prices in cities who have a high percentage of low income families. That is nonsense. How would you like to charge more to people who are struggling!?

I don’t want these people to mess up with Star Trek. Their practices are not good for us, the consumers.

I really do not understand the ins and outs of all of the anti-trust side of a merger so I can offer no comments as to that subject but is anyone here young enough to remember when there was just TV and you paid for basic cable or an antenna. You could get movie channels added to your lineup but you did not have to to get quality TV. There is literally nothing worth watching on regular TV now. How many streaming services are you going to have to join to get a decent lineup. I have Disney, Netflix and HBOMax and refuse to acquire more. My thoughts are with low income individuals or those with large families that simply can not afford multiple streaming services so my hope would be that more time and effort could be spent in developing regular TV instead of mega streaming services.

One need to look at the current cash cows and who has them.
Paramount’s is Star Trek
Disney’s is Star Wars, Marvel, and The Simpsons
Warner Bros is DC comics, various Cartoons, and Harry Potter
Sony/Columbia is Spider-Man and anything Marvel that Disney doesn’t own
Universal is Jurassic Park and the Fast and Furious

Disney is currently chowing down on Sony and looking for a possible grab at the mismanaged DC from WB, so Universal’s best bet is a marriage to Paramount to bolster its flagging and aging franchises.

By mid-century there’s probably be just two major studios.

Yeah, a purchase of Sony from Disney might be likely, especially with the new wave of mergers. Part of the WarnerMedia-Discovery merger might’ve been just a stunt to sell the whole company to the highest bidder. So we might see 2 more of the 6 major studios owned by Disney soon.

Seems like this would create issues for the FTC. I can’t see them getting behind a company owning Paramount Pictures, Universal Pictures, NBC, and CBS.

Strange New Worlds back on NBC… That would be the day :-)

They didn’t let Disney own both ABC and Fox.

Maybe we’ll get the Star Trek – Battlestar Galactica crossover movie that no one wants.

Nah, but the GALAXY QUEST/CLASSIC BATTLESTAR GALACTICA crossover would definitely have several humorous possibilities that some might enjoy.

Ferengi Rules of Acquisition:
#9 -> Opportunity plus instinct equals profit. (O+I=$)

—————————

Go back to this article (https://trekmovie.com/2021/06/01/big-media-mergers-and-executive-changes-point-to-possible-changes-at-paramount/) TrekMovie ran on June 1st where they mentioned that several analysts were predicting that ViacomCbsParamount would be acquired by the likes of Comcast.

The article and the comments are interesting.

There is a point of saturation at which the big mergers that can slip below the monopoly radar in the USA will have done so. I think that the saturation point for HUGE mergers will be reached in another 5-10 years.

Then you will see odd mergers from small-fries who will then begin swallowing remaining studios in an attempt to get more useable IP and and more viewer eyeballs.

Just today, the following story: “Naver, the company behind Webtoon, acquires the fiction site Wattpad, with the two platforms merging to form a new entertainment studio together. Wattpad WEBTOON Studios will create new movies and TV series adapted from the stories published on both online platforms. South Korean media company Naver recently acquired Wattpad and will merge it with Webtoon, which Naver also owns and operates. Wattpad WEBTOON Studios will focus on promoting and developing the comic and YA properties that originate on the two online services.

Sony and CrunchyRoll are creating a live action production studio to develop their anime legacy IP. Many companies in South Korea and Japan are doing small acquisitions to get larger so they can do the same.

American companies like Steam, EA, Lego, Hasbro, and Microsoft are seeking new ways and new mediums to exploit their existing IP in order to win more eyeballs. It won’t be long before others like them also start looking at whatever remains of the old studios to determine if their IP libraries are worth acquisition.

Again, there are many more potential buyers for the remaining content producers than are obvious at first glance.

The issue is who needs to grow their audience size with greater urgency.

POST-MERGER, the next issue is for any fan of an IP to realize that these mergers are about profit. They are rarely about protecting a beloved IP. Rarely do you get a situation where a Disney acquires both a Marvel and a Kevin Feige, where Feige will fight tooth and nail to protect the IP that he and millions of fans love so dearly.

No. The typical case is you get a company following the Ferengi Rules of Acquisition #21 and #10: Never put friendship over profit… Greed is eternal. You get Disney acquiring LucasFilm, then showing George Lucas to the door. Meanwhile they bring in JJ to do for that franchise what he did to Trek: pander and mystery box it such that it is a shiny, shallow reflection of the core DNA that made it great. It would not have cost them much to go the Feige way and create a well-thought out plan for future growth and development. NOTE TO SELF: if Feige’s Star Wars film rocks Disney’s bottom line, you can bet that Feige will quickly be put in charge of all Disney large legacy IP (MCU, LucasFilm, FOX, PIXAR, My Little Pony…) and will be tracked toward the CEO position.

Anyway, you can mostly count on newly purchased IP being misemployed to quickly produce profit.

That said, do I worry about Amazon purchasing MGM and what that means for James Bond? Not a whit. Amazon purchased Bond’s distribution rights that MGM owned, and they purchased the existing Bond library. EON Productions firmly and securely owns all current and future Bond film making authority. EON is owned by the children of the originating Bond film maker. Its like LOTR: the Tolkien family manages that IP with an iron fist, but they will work certain deals with certain studios. EON (under Barbara Broccoli and Michael Wilson – half siblings) is like Feige and the Tolkien family – they alone set the vision and tone for what Bond will be.

Sorry for the ramble.

I’m no fan of the Disney Star Wars movie trilogy, but it was naive of Lucas to think Disney would spend 4 billion and then proceed with his films outline focused around microscopic Force organisms. Numerous concepts from Lucas actually do show up in Force Awakens and Last Jedi, but Bob Iger was quite clear that the main goal was commercial nostalgia. Lucas shouldn’t have been shocked at that either. But your take ignores streaming, and ignores the Star Wars of Jon Favreau who also had no small role in launching Feige’s empire which you take to be the gold standard. I know I’m not alone in thinking the last batch of Mandalorian was superior to the muddled Falcon & Bucky Adventures (compared to the more successful WandaVision and thus far, Loki). So considering streaming, which is what everyone is focused on now, Marvel and Star Wars look to be at a comparable level of quality- well-crafted, reverential, with just enough creativity and novelty under corporate Disney strictures to justify watching, for viewers addicted to such candied fluffery.

Hi Nakamura-Dono,

It won’t surprise you that I disagree with you. And that I liked Falco and Bucky.

But that is immaterial.

What I do appreciate is that you got through my ramble.

Thank you!

Seriously, I feel that it is interesting to have 2 examples of doing IP acquisition under one corporate umbrella that are so very different in execution. My point is agnostic of medium (streaming or otherwise).

The MCU has been protected and nurtured and planned and developed under a protector’s stewardship. With flaws and mistakes. And the result is well more than $23 billion and an exponentially larger global fan base since the launch of Iron Man.

Meanwhile Star Wars was simply milked to get big profits from uneven, disjointed, and poorly connected films. Only with the promotion of Dave Filoni to a creative authority within Lucas a few years ago … which resulted in bringing in Favreau to do Mandolorian … only with Filoni exerting some authority do you begin to see planning and long term narrative strategy. Much like you see from Feige.

Kudos to Team Filo-Fav!

My question to Disney is simply this: if from 2008 to the present you have the great example of more huge wins than failures under Feige, why don’t you replicate the plan at Star Wars… the franchise that should be producing 2 to 3 times more profit than the Marvel, and doing it faster.

Remember, in 2008 Disney knew Marvel was a great buy. But they also knew that Marvel’s characters were less prized and less well-known at that time versus DC’s characters. Thus there was a lot of internal debate about which of its characters to launch with. In 2008, prior to the launch of Iron Man, if anyone had said there would be a day when the Marvel Brand would be a more consistent profit producer than Star Wars, you would say that would be flat out stupid.

Today, Marvel – despite issues here and there – is indisputably a more consistent profit producer and fan pleaser than Star Wars.

Great leadership, great planning and great vision are the keys.

These are what are needed if you want to protect and grow profitable IP in mergers and acquisitions. If leadership is more concerned with profit taking, kiss your beloved IPs goodbye.

I think Comcast would be in it to simply milk profits.

Comcast would not come with a plan and vision to nurture IPs, to grow audiences, and strengthen brand attachment… and through it, build mounds of consistent profitability.

Last edited 1 month ago by Tarnwood

Paracock+ … I love the sound of that :-)

PeamountΩ

Viaversal.

This is a safe space for commenters to complain about their Comcast internet and cable. I would note that AT&T is no better, and that has fluck all to do with the content created at HBO Max. I mean, sure, media conglomerates that are service providers and content creators, yes it is relevant to discuss how those interact, but don’t look to an ISP’s data caps as to how their corporate siblings will handle a Space Rangers franchise; or if you do analyze that, it would take quite the cavernous dive.

AT&T is a perfect nightmare scenario for how a telecom could use Hollywood assets. It funneled resources into HBO Max, alienating respected creatives and leaders there and at WarnerMedia. It diluted that brand with a messy rollout, it rankled many top Hollywood talents with its Covid strategy, and it ended up deciding it had to start extricating itself from the business because it wasn’t helping them sell wireless plans.

When it comes to Big Tech carving up Hollywood, Apple so far has just decided to go it alone and Netflix has spent heavily but wants to kill the broadcast and theatrical models. Amazon is fraught with ethical issues, but as a parent company to MGM it probably would be fine. They can spend unlimited funds and really just want Prime content as an incentive for people to subscribe since subscribers buy thousands of dollars more crap on Amazon than non-subscribers. It’s sad to see Hollywood used like this, but creative independence and the ability to compete effectively for resources is key in the end.

Why can’t Paramount+ just work to make a great streaming app? I’m actually starting to enjoy the app, besides trek. The Smithsonian content is really cool, I grew up on Nickelodeon and loved seeing those old cartoons I used to devour as a kid, and Seal Team and Frasier, two favorite shows. And the MI franchise is awesome! The selection of movies are getting much better. Oh, and the my list, finally!

I don’t want to see Comcast grab ahold of CBS or Paramount. Im not a fan of NBC at all. I don’t know why-well $$$- that everyone has to be the top dog by merging.

Tony and Laurie: Please discuss this in Fridays podcast to give those of us outside of the TV business, what this might mean.

End Communication!

I think the biggest worry is going to be having the capital to compete. Amazon and Apple just collectively spent about a billion dollars on first seasons of Lord of the Rings, Foundation and Invasion alone. Game of Thrones’ budgets were insane, the StageCraft studio cost The Mandalorian $100 million before a single frame had been shot.

Discovery and Picard are crazy expensive, so ViacomCBS is gamely competing, but the bar is very high and they are less insulated if a costly show or movie flops or if Paramount+ doesn’t turn a profit sooner than later. But all it takes is one killer new franchise and they can more easily go it alone. It’s not impossible. Once upon a time they could have bought Marvel. It was a big gamble to bet big on live action Transformers movies. Yellowstone has been a big hit, Halo could be huge, and the Trek shows obviously have been successful (thanks in part to overseas licensing) behind a paywall. But it still means spending big on budgets and talent deals.

Last edited 1 month ago by Ian

100 mil for StageCraft sounds awfully high to me, even if you were figuring in the cost of all the various tech parties who each have a part that gets seamed together to make it work.

There are variations on the process popping up all over, and those new places all sure don’t have pockets anywhere near that deep.

That’s the figure I’ve seen quoted. Even if it’s inflated, my guess is that other companies have found ways to make AR walls work as well without having to start from scratch and with some new efficiencies.

I was really expecting Apple to buy up Viacom/Paramount.

I get the sense it would be a messy company to suddenly control. The appeal of instantly being able to massively expand the AppleTV+ library and own more respected brands and IP is surely alluring, but while Star Trek is totally Apple, Jersey Shore and NCIS: Los Angeles? Not so much. And then you add all the complications that owning so many networks and studios brings and it is not really the sort of thing I see Tim Cook being into having to manage. They make quality products and services. Okaying a tv show or movie is in that wheelhouse, owning a studio could even be in that wheelhouse. Managing a big media empire like ViacomCBS’ might not be.

I kind of admire them for doggedly curating their own brand of original programming. Not everything is a winner, but it’s all unique and there are some real gems like Mythic Quest, Ted Lasso and For All Mankind, plus the likes of Foundation and Scorsese’s future plans are projects only a company with money to burn could green light. I respect them for not coming in and just gobbling up a company, rather coming in and hiring too talent and injecting capital into the industry, patiently.

BSG Star Trek crossover???

GALAXY QUEST/CLASSIC BATTLESTAR GALACTICA has better crossover possibilities.

I am a huge fan of Star Trek and I am not sure what this possible merger will man for the franchise. I still can’t stop thinking about The Next Generation episode that aired toward the end of the first season called The Neutral Zone. In that after three humans from the twentieth century were rescued from cryogentic sleep by Worf and Data. One of the twentieth century humans asks about tv. and at first Data and Riker didn’t understand the question. It Data a moment to realize what they meant and Data stated that television was phased out in 2040. So, I do wonder is that the fate of tv. to be gone as a form of entertainment by then? Anything is possible. That is what worries me about all of these mergers. I mean Disney recently acquired The Simpsons and Fox’s movie studio and film library. Fox it’s self is a separate entity along with their sports and news division. I am not sure if I am in favor of this merger. I love Paramount Plus for its Star Trek and Smithsonian content. I do wish my other favorite shows like Matlock and Diagnosis Murder would be available for streaming. I am paying a fortune for Paramount Plus at $99.00 year I feel that it is worth it just to avoid the commercials that I hate, can’t stand, and find annoying.

I do have HBO Max, Disney Plus, ESPN Plus, and Hulu through Verizion Fios which I am happy and pleased with. I do have the Starz App through Verizion Fios as well. Just today Amazon Fire TV App just added Peacock to their streaming App.

As you can tell I am a huge fan of Verizon Fios and Amazon streaming service. I do have their Prime Membership. So, with Verizion Fios, cell, internet, landline phone service I am covered along with all of those streaming Apps. Still, I do worry about the future of television and what this possible merger will mean to all involved. One thing I do love about HBO Max is that their DC Comics Content is great. I can watch all old and new cartoons there as well new tv. shows. I am not a big Marvel fan.

I did notice a slight spelling error where one person used the wrong spelling of there. They used their which is wrong and they meant there. Their means yours or someone else. There means something totally different.

I am looking to add Boomerang App which is owned and operated by Cartoon Network and has a lot of my old cartoons such as Captain Caveman, The Flintstones, The Smurfs, Scooby Doo, and whole lot more. I do wonder what this merger will mean for those Apps and more. I am not a fan of Comcast.

In the early 2000’s I had Comcast and hated them. I had no choice as they were the only cable cable company around. Then around 2005 Verizion came along and I got them and kept Comcast to see which is better. I went with Verizion and never went back to Comcast. Yes, I know that Verizion is not as technically advanced and Comcast and that doesn’t matter to me. I love the service and free items I get from them being such a loyal customer.

Verizion acquiring some assets to compete with Comcast wouldn’t be a such a bad idea as I prefer them to Comcast.

I do agree with a lot of comments and opinions here and I wanted to add my two cents.

Also ViacomCBS may want to purchase the Japanese company Sega Sammy Holdings and Liomsgate

The way things are today merging with others is probably the only way streamers can compete with the likes of Disney. The sad thing is those mergers make huge conglomerates that ultimately mean fewer options for consumers. These huge companies IMHO are not a good idea. I was surprised when the NBC Comcast merger was allowed many years ago. And things have only gotten worse since. Amazon, Google, Disney and others. All these overly huge companies really do need to get broken down.

This will never be approved by government

Simple harsh truth of the ‘streaming wars’. Netflix is the ‘800 LB Gorilla’ with Disney+ surging on the back of their IP’s. Amazon Prime has the benefit of being tied into the popular Prime sub service. There’s just too many of them now and people mostly just stick with 1-3 of those services and mostly ignore the others unless they have a specific interest like Star Trek which alone isn’t enough to carry a service like Paramount+. Consolidation is their only long term chance IMO.

I guess a viacomCBS/Comcast merge would balance things somewhat with big Disney. And Star Trek started on NBC

I know the merger is bad

Sure if this goes through they’ll make all the content that’s free on Peacock under the monthly subscription. Remember Yrs ago when HULU was free.

Curse you comcast you ruined ViacomCBS FOREVER. Its all your fault national amusements just sell ViacomCBS to Verizon instead how does that sound and everyone here can tell the people at Comcast to give up on buying ViacomCBS huh how does that sound as well, and Comcast why and buy Nintendo and viendi instead hows that sound.