Welcome to the latest edition of State of the Screens.  

Estimated reading time: 2 minutes [633 words]

Please forward this to friends and encourage them to sign up here. 

Onward,

Michael Beach

Larry Ellison Added a Paramount to His Net Worth in Two Hours

Skydance is preparing a bid for WarnerBros Discovery, and if successful, it will merge with Paramount to form a monster company. One writer has already given it a name: Warnermount.

Larry Ellison, Skydance’s main backer, saw his net worth jump by more than $100B in a single day. Paramount is a major media company, but next to a tech balance sheet, it looks like the bug that explodes on your windshield at 70 mph.

These two stories are connected. Together, they explain why the next era of Hollywood won’t be about who has the best studio lot, but about who has the deepest pockets and biggest balance sheet.

This week, I’ll break it down into four big questions:
1) How big would Warnermount be?
2) Why do the traditional media companies need to consolidate?
3) Why is Larry Ellison different from past Hollywood moguls?
4) What does this mean for advertisers?

How big would Warnermount be?

Warnermount scale:
1) Total TV time - #2 (13.1%)
2) Streaming subscribers (U.S.) - #3 (79.5M)
3) Streaming subscribers (global) - #2 (209.3M)
4) Ad-supported streaming subscribers (U.S.) - #4 (20.0M)
5) Box office revenue - #2 ($5B)

Share of total TV time (Nielsen):
1) YouTube - 13.4%
2) Warnermount - 13.1%
3) Disney - 8.8%
4) Netflix - 8.8%
5) NBCUniversal - 7.6%
6) Fox - 6.5%
7) Amazon - 3.9% 

Streaming subscribers (U.S.)(Kagan):
1) Netflix - 81.7M
2) Disney - 131.6M
3) Warnermount - 79.5M
4) Peacock - 41.0M

Streaming subscribers (Global)(Kagan):
1) Netflix - 312.5M
2) Warnermount - 209.3M
3) Disney - 207.3M

Box office revenue (Comscore):
1) Disney - $5.5B
2) Warnermount - $5.0B
3) Universal - $3.8B
4) Sony - $2.4B

Why do the traditional media companies need to consolidate?

They’re too small to compete. Each tech giant (below) is worth more than all media companies combined.

Even private AI players (OpenAI, Anthropic) dwarf Paramount, Fox, and WarnerBros Discovery together.

The story does not get much better when you look at advertising revenue.

Why is Larry Ellison different from past Hollywood moguls?

Larry Ellison is one of the richest people in the world and is actively investing in the media space (Skydance).  Hollywood has experienced its fair share of moguls from outside entertainment, including Howard Hughes (aviation/oil) and Kirk Kerkorian (casinos). Still, the combination of capital, ambition, and influence over technology (AI, TikTok, etc.) is different. 

Big payday: On August 7th, Skydance closed its Paramount deal.  34 days later, Larry Ellison experienced the largest single-day increase in net worth (+$108B) in human history. 

Quick math on Larry Ellison's single-day stock increase:
1) Larry Ellison’s Oracle stock grew by $108B on September 10th
2) Skydance paid $8B for Paramount
3) Ellison’s stock grew $8B in less than 2 hours

What does this mean for advertisers?

Both Paramount+ and HBO Max are behind in building out ad-supported subscribers.  Even a combined company would only offer 20M, which is far behind Prime Video, Hulu, and Peacock.

Ad-supported subscribers (U.S.)(Activate Consulting):
1) Prime Video - 47M (83%)
2) Hulu - 30M (58%)
3) Peacock - 26M (79%)
4) Warnermount - 20M (29%)
5) Disney+ - 16M (32%)
6) Netflix - 11M (15%)

The Day $100B Fell From the Sky: Larry Ellison, Skydance’s biggest backer, gained more wealth in a single day than Paramount is worth in total (several times over). One man’s stock bump equaled an entire legacy studio.

In the new Hollywood, money isn’t just leverage. It’s gravity.

The Old Moguls vs. The New Ones: Howard Hughes had planes. Kerkorian had casinos. They dabbled in Hollywood for glory, not dominance. Ellison is different: tech money, AI bets, global ambitions. He’s not visiting Hollywood—he’s rewiring it.

The moguls of the past bought studios. The moguls of today buy the future.

Bottom line: Old Hollywood ran on stars and studios. New Hollywood runs on cash and code.