HBOMax Explained and Streaming Service 2022 Year End Review!

Snarf Zagyg

Notorious Liquefactionist
Technically, if they leverage everything that they can drop...which no one sane would do.

Their actual capital they can use is hardly anything close to that from what I understand.

Ugh. Look, the magic thing about publicly traded companies is that they have to disclose these things on a regular basis. The other thing is that words like "cash and cash equivalents" have a real meaning- these are assets that either in cash or are considered the equivalent. You don't have to write, "From what I understand," you can actually just quickly look it up.

That said, it doesn't appear you are interested in the facts- look, companies are not individuals buying a house. Companies don't get mortgages. Disney, when they purchased Fox (for example) didn't open up Rocket Mortgage on their iPhone to see how they could afford a $71.3 billion "mortgage." It's somewhat bizarre that this is the argument you are making, given that Apple:
1. Has notoriously, and for a long time, had a mountain of cash, to the extent where they finally had to start dividends. Like ... unheard of amounts of cash. How mountainous? It's public, every quarter.
2. Is a company worth $2.3 trillion right now, which is (checking math) a huge amount more than Disney. Okay, it's more than 13 times bigger. Which ... yeah. This isn't a merger of equals. And Disney's price includes a lot of things Apple wouldn't purchase (see, e.g., the Disney purchase of Fox).
3. Also? I made the reference to the cash because Apple could do it- but that's not how deals are structured ... for a lot of reasons. Tax reasons (Apple and Disney are both good at avoiding those) and also because it is usually beneficial to creatively structure it- that's why they pay the M&A guys the big bucks.

The reason Apple won't buy Disney really boils down to the following (roughly in order of importance, with the last being by far the most important):
A. Apple doesn't buy other companies like this. They either make targeted acquisitions (such as various investments and acquisitions to get their chips in-house) or small ones. The largest, but far, was Beats for $3 billion. It's a cultural thing- they generally don't like to on-board a bunch of new people.

B. The actual deal would be really complicated. There is absolutely no way that Apple would want to purchase major components of Disney- the linear networks (aka, ABC, ESPN, etc.), the Parks and Entertainment (which has a lot of employees, physical assets, and international contractual relationships as well as merch) as well as other specific components. They would be in it for the IP and (to a much lesser extent) DTC operations. This isn't impossible to do, but it would be incredibly hard to untangle and get value.

C. Given the current regulatory climate in DC (see, e.g., Activision and Microsoft) and Brussels (see, e.g., everything) I don't think Apple wants a deal like this on anyone's radar.

So, yeah, there are a lot of exceptionally good reasons why the strategic rumors about Apple are completely wrong and likely floated for a purpose. But "Companies are just people that buy mortgages," is not one of them.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

GreyLord

Legend
Ugh. Look, the magic thing about publicly traded companies is that they have to disclose these things on a regular basis. The other thing is that words like "cash and cash equivalents" have a real meaning- these are assets that either in cash or are considered the equivalent. You don't have to write, "From what I understand," you can actually just quickly look it up.

That said, it doesn't appear you are interested in the facts- look, companies are not individuals buying a house. Companies don't get mortgages. Disney, when they purchased Fox (for example) didn't open up Rocket Mortgage on their iPhone to see how they could afford a $71.3 billion "mortgage." It's somewhat bizarre that this is the argument you are making, given that Apple:
1. Has notoriously, and for a long time, had a mountain of cash, to the extent where they finally had to start dividends. Like ... unheard of amounts of cash. How mountainous? It's public, every quarter.
2. Is a company worth $2.3 trillion right now, which is (checking math) a huge amount more than Disney. Okay, it's more than 13 times bigger. Which ... yeah. This isn't a merger of equals. And Disney's price includes a lot of things Apple wouldn't purchase (see, e.g., the Disney purchase of Fox).
3. Also? I made the reference to the cash because Apple could do it- but that's not how deals are structured ... for a lot of reasons. Tax reasons (Apple and Disney are both good at avoiding those) and also because it is usually beneficial to creatively structure it- that's why they pay the M&A guys the big bucks.

The reason Apple won't buy Disney really boils down to the following (roughly in order of importance, with the last being by far the most important):
A. Apple doesn't buy other companies like this. They either make targeted acquisitions (such as various investments and acquisitions to get their chips in-house) or small ones. The largest, but far, was Beats for $3 billion. It's a cultural thing- they generally don't like to on-board a bunch of new people.

B. The actual deal would be really complicated. There is absolutely no way that Apple would want to purchase major components of Disney- the linear networks (aka, ABC, ESPN, etc.), the Parks and Entertainment (which has a lot of employees, physical assets, and international contractual relationships as well as merch) as well as other specific components. They would be in it for the IP and (to a much lesser extent) DTC operations. This isn't impossible to do, but it would be incredibly hard to untangle and get value.

C. Given the current regulatory climate in DC (see, e.g., Activision and Microsoft) and Brussels (see, e.g., everything) I don't think Apple wants a deal like this on anyone's radar.

So, yeah, there are a lot of exceptionally good reasons why the strategic rumors about Apple are completely wrong and likely floated for a purpose. But "Companies are just people that buy mortgages," is not one of them.

YES, I DID look it up.

They DON'T have the capital on hand to actually buy Disney. You are right, it IS easily looked up, but may be hard to understand for people who don't understand the language.

They would have to liquidate some items in order to do so and take money slated for investing elsewhere into buying Disney. Buying Disney outright is a HUGE risk in comparison to other areas they would probably rather put that money into.

And that's what it really boils down to. Cost vs. worth vs. risk. The cost right now wouldn't be worth the other two items to Apple.

However, I try to be nice (still am, actually) when talking on forums about these things...which is why I many times do NOT speak in absolutes or as if I am actually a know it all in these things or know more than others, even if I may know a bit more than some. This is to be polite and a CYA type thing, because hey, you never know if you may have something off. But in this instance, I haven't seen anything that says my information is wrong or off.

When we are talking available capital, we are referring to things like this

Apple cash on hand for 2022 was $48.304B, a 22.89% decline from 2021. Apple cash on hand for 2021 was $62.639B, a 31.12% decline from 2020.

You are right, these things are NOT hard to look up. Please do not ASSUME I did NOT look these things up to begin with.

PS: That does not mean that Apple may not be offered items in the future, or that someone isn't trying to investigate instigating a deal by trying to drop a line on the internet to see how it is accepted or taken, but I don't see Apple buying Disney outright. For starters, they simply don't have the capital available. As I said, just because something is WORTH a certain amount does not mean they actually have that much money available to spend.

People seem VERY confused on that point. I tried to explain it as simply as I could with an example I think most people could understand. I don't know if I got the point across though.
 

Snarf Zagyg

Notorious Liquefactionist
When we are talking available capital, we are referring to things like this

This is what gets spit out when you google, "How much cash does apple have" You have not impressed me with your deep understanding.

On the internet, no one knows you are a dog. But they can tell if someone knows what you are talking about by their choice of words. Maybe they are intelligently discussing a topic with the terms that are use, and maybe they keep referring to a love for kibble.

We're good.

You are right, these things are NOT hard to look up. Please do not ASSUME I did NOT look these things up to begin with.

Yep. Not hard. you do have to do more than google and cut & paste the first result you see.

PS: That does not mean that Apple may not be offered items in the future, or that someone isn't trying to investigate instigating a deal by trying to drop a line on the internet to see how it is accepted or taken, but I don't see Apple buying Disney outright. For starters, they simply don't have the capital available. As I said, just because something is WORTH a certain amount does not mean they actually have that much money available to spend.

People seem VERY confused on that point. I tried to explain it as simply as I could with an example I think most people could understand. I don't know if I got the point across though.

No. This is, and was, a terrible point. There are all types of mergers and acquisitions. All types of LBOs. Companies can, and do, acquire companies that are larger than they are.

Trying to make an analogy to buying a home for an individual homeowner is ... beyond not helpful. It's the same type of mistake people make when they try and discuss sovereign debt and they're like, "It's just like your credit card."

It's not. Terribly analogies obfuscate- they don't help.

But it's pretty clear to me that you aren't interested in the underlying facts or issues, so I don't think we need to continue the conversation. Take care.
 
Last edited:

GreyLord

Legend
This is what gets spit out when you google, "How much cash does apple have" You have not impressed me with your deep understanding.

On the internet, no one knows you are a dog. But they can tell if someone knows what you are talking about by their choice of words. Maybe they are intelligently discussing a topic with the terms that are use, and maybe they keep referring to a love for kibble.

We're good.



Yep. Not hard. you do have to do more than google and cut & paste the first result you see.



No. This is, and was, a terrible point. There are all types of mergers and acquisitions. All types of LBOs. Companies can, and do, acquire companies that are larger than they are.

Trying to make an analogy to buying a home for an individual homeowner is ... beyond not helpful. It's the same type of mistake people make when they try and discuss sovereign debt and they're like, "It's just like your credit card."

It's not. Terribly analogies obfuscate- they don't help.

But it's pretty clear to me that you aren't interested in the underlying facts or issues, so I don't think we need to continue the conversation. Take care.

Getting a little personal there...eh?

I admit I may not be the best at explaining things that seem clear to me, but may not be as clear as intended to others....I was not a teacher.

I thought to type something up, but then...I thought...is this really worth it. You have no idea who I am...and it's probably better that way in the long run...

You be you though.
 
Last edited:


Snarf Zagyg

Notorious Liquefactionist
So following up on the latest news-

HBOMax has announced that they are pulling Raised by Wolves, Time Traveler's Wife, FBoy Island (that's the real tragedy!), and Finding Magic Mike.

These shows join The Nevers, Love Life, Westworld, Gordita Chronicles, Minx, Legendary, and Made for Love. Although I'm sure I've missed a few in the two-day orgy of bloodletting Zaslav has been going through.

Trades are reporting that WBD (Warner Bros. Discovery) is looking to up the "savings" from 2-2.5 billion to 2.8-3.5 billion. It take a lot of pennies to get to another billion!

Again, the weird thing about this isn't shows disappearing- this happens all the time for licensing reasons; it's just incredibly odd to see a company that owns the rights to shows deliberately disappear them. Strange times, indeed!
 

Count_Zero

Adventurer
The suspicion I've seen is this is all to avoid paying residuals to the people who worked on those shows. So, they're probably not going to receive a physical media release either.
 

billd91

Not your screen monkey (he/him)
The suspicion I've seen is this is all to avoid paying residuals to the people who worked on those shows. So, they're probably not going to receive a physical media release either.
I don't believe suspicion is involved. We're pretty damn sure it's to avoid paying residuals for any continued viewership. They're apparently making the determination that the odds of those shows bringing new subscribers to the platform is outweighed by the chance that current subscribers might actually watch them.
 

Cadence

Legend
Supporter
And so now I'm worried that "A Christmas Story Christmas" might get nuked and not be available in perpetuity since it is on HBO Max.

Is that silly because they know holiday shows are evergreen? Does it matter that their subsidiary Turner Entertainment is the rights holder? If they do say it's going away how much of my "respect IP" cred do I lose if I make a copy?
 

Stalker0

Legend
I won’t lie, I actually really liked time travelers wife, I’m no romance movie lover. But it was a cool premise followed through very well.
 

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Upcoming Releases

Top