What we’re watching is the various constituencies of the old Hollywood economic system realizing that they want different things from New Paramount.
THR’s framing is that Bonta and Ellison are effectively splitting organized Hollywood into camps because the guilds’ members occupy very different positions in the production economy.
And I think that helps explain why the DGA/IATSE letter seemed almost absurdly onerous from Ellison’s perspective.
DGA/IATSE aren’t really supporting Ellison’s merger. They’re proposing something closer to a regulated holding company - like the luxury conglomerate parallel I'm fond of.
Their conditions include separate Paramount and Warner Bros. movie studios with distinct production, distribution and marketing operations; at least 15 theatrical releases annually from each studio; minimum theatrical windows; continued third-party film and television licensing; HBO remaining available through outside distributors; minimum levels of U.S. production; and Paramount remaining based in Los Angeles.
But what about the synergies? Where are the synergies?
If Ellison pays an enormous control premium to combine the companies and is then legally obligated to maintain duplicate distribution departments, duplicate marketing departments, duplicate production organizations and minimum output levels, a substantial portion of the traditional merger arithmetic disappears.
But viewed from IATSE’s perspective, that’s precisely the point.
A grip doesn’t particularly care whether New Paramount achieves a magnificent unified recommendation engine in 2031. He cares whether there are 30 movies employing crews next year. A director cares whether there continue to be multiple buyers competing to hire directors.
So DGA/IATSE are effectively saying:
You may consolidate the capital structure. You may not consolidate away the marketplace that employs us.
That’s a fascinating distinction.
And the WGA’s position is actually more internally consistent. The WGA essentially says:
Don't merge.
That sounds more radical, but economically it’s cleaner. Writers benefit from having more competing buyers. If Paramount and Warner combine, even with contractual promises about output, there is ultimately one corporate parent allocating capital.
THR notes that the WGA and SAG-AFTRA remain opposed while DGA/IATSE are pushing toward resolution; Teamsters Local 399 has separately attacked the relocation threat.
So Hollywood labor isn’t really dividing over whether David Ellison is good or bad. They’re dividing according to where each craft sits in the value chain.
When the antitrust trial over the planned $111 billion merger between Paramount Skydance and Warner Bros. Discovery was scheduled for March 2027, the delay was viewed as a major blow to studio CEO David Ellison and his team.
hollywoodreporter.com/busine…