Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Geek Talk & Media
Warner Bros. Now Deleting Games
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Snarf Zagyg" data-source="post: 9287283" data-attributes="member: 7023840"><p>To address this briefly-</p><p></p><p>Not everything has the same explanation. I wish people would try and understand this simply concept. Or, put more simply, a company can do X, Y, and Z, and you can dislike X, Y, and Z ... but they may have completely different reasons for doing X, Y, and Z ... and they don't all fall under the rubric of, "Because they're evil and hate you."</p><p></p><p>I mean, it might be the case, but still...</p><p></p><p>Now, if you ever read my previous regularly updated power rankings on the streaming wars (now discontinued due to lack of interest), you'd know that I dislike Zaslav and believe that the Discovery/Warner merger has largely been disastrous for many reasons. That said, you can't just put all of their actions in a single bucket. Here's a quick breakdown-</p><p></p><p>A. Not releasing completed movies (Batgirl, etc.). This was purely for tax reasons. As part of the post-merger restructuring, they wrote off almost $2 billion. Why Batgirl in particular? This also went to a pivot in strategy- Batgirl was originally going to be a streaming-only movie. But now, they are concentrating on movies with theatrical releases prior to streaming. They determined that Batgirl was not going to make money theatrically to recoup the expenditure, so instead wrote it off. In addition, to get the tax benefit, they can't show it to the public.</p><p></p><p>B. Removing shows and movies from streaming. This was both for tax reasons (see, e.g., American Pickle), but also due to contracts and residuals. Some shows (in their determination) cost them more to keep on the streaming platform than it was worth to them.</p><p></p><p>Understanding why they were making these decisions is simple-go to the incentives. There are three main factors at play-</p><p></p><p>1. Wall Street suddenly reversed course and demanded profitability from the streamers, not acquisition of new subscribers, which impacted stock prices and has impacted all of the companies with a major streaming component.</p><p></p><p>2. The new company has a massive debt burden, and has been working to reduce that debt burden.</p><p></p><p>3. And, of course, Zaslav changed his compensation scheme so that he was no longer rewarded by share price, but by free cash. I mean .... c'mon!</p><p></p><p>Viewed in this light, everything they are doing has made sense. It is why, for example, Max is licensing the "crown jewels" (major movies like Dune and HBO series) to other streamers, like Netflix. Because MONEY. And it's why they are cutting back on other things-like unprofitable legacy gaming.</p><p></p><p>In short, it does suck. But as we have learned repeatedly (and as everyone should know) .... there are no rights to streaming from the consumer. Yes, it is wonderful that we get these vast libraries of content that are available, but you really shouldn't <em>depend </em>on any particular thing being available. If you read through the linked article, you will see that they are allowing the games' creators to continue publishing on their own. Now, maybe this will resolve in other ways, and that would be great. But given that the "journalism-like" substance tries to claim that the process would take two minutes at the most ... which confuses and understates the technical process for the internal legal review that would have to occur ... I doubt that there is any real attempt to understand what is going on.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Snarf Zagyg, post: 9287283, member: 7023840"] To address this briefly- Not everything has the same explanation. I wish people would try and understand this simply concept. Or, put more simply, a company can do X, Y, and Z, and you can dislike X, Y, and Z ... but they may have completely different reasons for doing X, Y, and Z ... and they don't all fall under the rubric of, "Because they're evil and hate you." I mean, it might be the case, but still... Now, if you ever read my previous regularly updated power rankings on the streaming wars (now discontinued due to lack of interest), you'd know that I dislike Zaslav and believe that the Discovery/Warner merger has largely been disastrous for many reasons. That said, you can't just put all of their actions in a single bucket. Here's a quick breakdown- A. Not releasing completed movies (Batgirl, etc.). This was purely for tax reasons. As part of the post-merger restructuring, they wrote off almost $2 billion. Why Batgirl in particular? This also went to a pivot in strategy- Batgirl was originally going to be a streaming-only movie. But now, they are concentrating on movies with theatrical releases prior to streaming. They determined that Batgirl was not going to make money theatrically to recoup the expenditure, so instead wrote it off. In addition, to get the tax benefit, they can't show it to the public. B. Removing shows and movies from streaming. This was both for tax reasons (see, e.g., American Pickle), but also due to contracts and residuals. Some shows (in their determination) cost them more to keep on the streaming platform than it was worth to them. Understanding why they were making these decisions is simple-go to the incentives. There are three main factors at play- 1. Wall Street suddenly reversed course and demanded profitability from the streamers, not acquisition of new subscribers, which impacted stock prices and has impacted all of the companies with a major streaming component. 2. The new company has a massive debt burden, and has been working to reduce that debt burden. 3. And, of course, Zaslav changed his compensation scheme so that he was no longer rewarded by share price, but by free cash. I mean .... c'mon! Viewed in this light, everything they are doing has made sense. It is why, for example, Max is licensing the "crown jewels" (major movies like Dune and HBO series) to other streamers, like Netflix. Because MONEY. And it's why they are cutting back on other things-like unprofitable legacy gaming. In short, it does suck. But as we have learned repeatedly (and as everyone should know) .... there are no rights to streaming from the consumer. Yes, it is wonderful that we get these vast libraries of content that are available, but you really shouldn't [I]depend [/I]on any particular thing being available. If you read through the linked article, you will see that they are allowing the games' creators to continue publishing on their own. Now, maybe this will resolve in other ways, and that would be great. But given that the "journalism-like" substance tries to claim that the process would take two minutes at the most ... which confuses and understates the technical process for the internal legal review that would have to occur ... I doubt that there is any real attempt to understand what is going on. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Geek Talk & Media
Warner Bros. Now Deleting Games
Top