Possible union between Disney and Warner as they cannot make their streaming services profitable separately due to excess supply
May, 13; 2024. By Arscodex
The Internet is an entity that evolves as time passes. Thus, the two most appreciated film companies, once competitors between them, Warner and Disney, are about to offer their streaming services jointly on the Internet, which represents a milestone for the video ecosystem on the network of networks.
According to the general press in much of the West, this fact is almost a reality, since in a matter of days the joint streaming offer between these two companies will materialize for users. But what does this mean? From this publication we see this movement as a symptom of weakness of these two companies, which amass a huge amount of intellectual property. And we list here the possible causes of this movement, according to our criteria.
In the short term we have a streaming company, Netflix, that is moving well in the internet video ecosystem, and although young, it is making the right decisions at all times, and today amasses many subscriptions to its service throughout the world. To compete with them, Disney and Warner cannot do more than unite to face the joint threat (we will have to see what the US anti-trust law says, which today and in our opinion will end up yielding to the solution that best protects the common interests of this country in the world).
But this is the problem in the short term. In the long term, the real problem is that there is a democratization of cinema, of video, on the Internet, in the sense that any person, yes, any person in this world, with their mobile phone camera, becomes a film director, potentially, and many of them are going to claim their share of the advertising pie/total internet video exploitation revenue.
That is to say, before there were five companies that made films, a kind of oligopoly, which amassed all the attempts to stay afloat in the market. But the current scenario is very different. Today, as we have said, each little person with their mobile phone is an actor in the streaming ecosystem, therefore, the advertising revenues, which previously fell entirely on these five companies, have been distributed among all the independent creators in the world. Therefore, each actor amasses less total income and there are also many more actors so there is a kind of redistribution of audiovisual wealth.
The main victims are, as we have mentioned, the large conglomerates, which previously had control of the matter but which today cannot compete either in quantity or even sometimes quality, with the multitude of videos that appear on the Internet daily. And, let us remember, according to the criteria of this publication, and technically, each video that appears on the Internet constitutes an autonomous film, yes, it is a short, a little movie, that competes with all the others.
The big beneficiaries, in the opinion of this publication, will be the small/medium-sized studios, which with low production costs have the possibility of, if they manage their talent well, reach millions of people in the world through the Internet.
And that's how things are. Returning to the beginning of the article, we repeat that the possible merger between Warner and Disney, which is currently very likely to happen, is a symptom of change in the audiovisual panorama of the Internet; first brought about by the good work of Netflix (and in the short term), but, in a hidden and sustained way, really due to the democratization of video and image brought about by the appearance of the network of networks on the face of the earth.
According to the general press in much of the West, this fact is almost a reality, since in a matter of days the joint streaming offer between these two companies will materialize for users. But what does this mean? From this publication we see this movement as a symptom of weakness of these two companies, which amass a huge amount of intellectual property. And we list here the possible causes of this movement, according to our criteria.
In the short term we have a streaming company, Netflix, that is moving well in the internet video ecosystem, and although young, it is making the right decisions at all times, and today amasses many subscriptions to its service throughout the world. To compete with them, Disney and Warner cannot do more than unite to face the joint threat (we will have to see what the US anti-trust law says, which today and in our opinion will end up yielding to the solution that best protects the common interests of this country in the world).
But this is the problem in the short term. In the long term, the real problem is that there is a democratization of cinema, of video, on the Internet, in the sense that any person, yes, any person in this world, with their mobile phone camera, becomes a film director, potentially, and many of them are going to claim their share of the advertising pie/total internet video exploitation revenue.
That is to say, before there were five companies that made films, a kind of oligopoly, which amassed all the attempts to stay afloat in the market. But the current scenario is very different. Today, as we have said, each little person with their mobile phone is an actor in the streaming ecosystem, therefore, the advertising revenues, which previously fell entirely on these five companies, have been distributed among all the independent creators in the world. Therefore, each actor amasses less total income and there are also many more actors so there is a kind of redistribution of audiovisual wealth.
The main victims are, as we have mentioned, the large conglomerates, which previously had control of the matter but which today cannot compete either in quantity or even sometimes quality, with the multitude of videos that appear on the Internet daily. And, let us remember, according to the criteria of this publication, and technically, each video that appears on the Internet constitutes an autonomous film, yes, it is a short, a little movie, that competes with all the others.
The big beneficiaries, in the opinion of this publication, will be the small/medium-sized studios, which with low production costs have the possibility of, if they manage their talent well, reach millions of people in the world through the Internet.
And that's how things are. Returning to the beginning of the article, we repeat that the possible merger between Warner and Disney, which is currently very likely to happen, is a symptom of change in the audiovisual panorama of the Internet; first brought about by the good work of Netflix (and in the short term), but, in a hidden and sustained way, really due to the democratization of video and image brought about by the appearance of the network of networks on the face of the earth.