Netflix’s Greg Peters on Why It Walked Away from the Warner Bros. Discovery Deal
Netflix walked away from its $82.7 billion bid to acquire Warner Bros. Discovery in February 2025 after Paramount Skydance offered $111 billion, a price Netflix deemed too high relative to member value. Despite the failed acquisition, Netflix reported strong performance in 2025 with $45.2 billion in revenue and over 325 million paid subscribers. The company continues to grow through investments in live sports, AI, advertising, and content partnerships rather than large-scale acquisitions.
- ▪Netflix withdrew its $82.7 billion offer for Warner Bros. Discovery after Paramount Skydance raised its bid to $111 billion.
- ▪Netflix earned $45.2 billion in revenue in 2025 and surpassed 325 million global paid subscribers.
- ▪The company acquired Ben Affleck's AI filmmaking company InterPositive and completed its own ad stack in 2025.
- ▪Netflix co-CEO Greg Peters emphasized that acquisitions must deliver clear value to members to be justified.
- ▪The ad-supported tier has become a key growth driver, offering lower prices and expanded audience reach.
Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand
At the end of 2025, Netflix was poised to complete a blockbuster deal: acquiring a major Hollywood studio. But in February, in a shocking reversal, the streaming giant walked away from its $82.7 billion bid to acquire Warner Bros. Discovery after refusing to counter Paramount Skydance’s revised offer of $111 billion. “We thought of Warner as a really exciting opportunity,” says Netflix co-CEO Greg Peters. “But just like in all the other cases, we size the opportunity based on the value back to our members in the business—and when someone's willing to go with a number that's bigger than that value to us, we say, ‘Great, good luck, and Godspeed.” The move—which resulted in a $2.8 billion termination fee from Paramount—was hardly an indication of weakness: in 2025, Netflix delivered $45.2…
Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at TIME — Top.
Discussion
0 commentsMore from TIME — Top
