← The Town with Matthew Belloni
The Town with Matthew Belloni
Can the Paramount-WBD Merger Survive a Trial, Midterms, and a $650 Million Clock?
00:36:38
Loading summary
Transcript113 lines
- [00:00]
A
Foreign. This episode of the Town is presented by HBO Max. HBO Max presents hacks nominated for 25 Emmy Awards, including Outstanding Comedy Series. In the aftermath of mistaken news reports that Deborah passed away, she and Ava returned to Las Vegas determined to secure Deborah's legacy as a comedian. Don't miss the series Variety is calling one of TV's best comedies ever. Hacks is now streaming on HBO Max. This episode is brought to you by Accenture. When your advertising operations fall out of sync, campaigns slow down, insights get buried and opportunities get missed. That's why Spotify and Accenture are working together to reinvent the rhythm of ad sales using automation, analytics and smarter workflows to simplify campaign delivery and access better data across the business. The result? Less time spent on operations, more time connecting brands with the moments and fandoms that matter most. To learn more, check out Accenture.com Spotify it is Wednesday, August 5th. We've got a trial date March 2nd, 2027 in Oakland, California. Paramount lawyers will square off with the attorney general of California in 11 states over whether the Ellison family should be allowed to also own Warner Brothers Discovery and its studio, including HBO and perhaps most importantly, cnn. Obviously, that trial date seven months from now is not what David Ellison wanted, given the $650 million per quarter ticking fee and the election coming in November. And it gives Rob Bonta and the state some pretty big leverage for a potential settlement. But Paramount is indeed getting what they asked for here, a trial on the merits of whether the combined Warner mount would give it too much power in the market for TV networks, wide release movies and the so called tentpole movies that the legacy studios specialize in making for theaters. There's been a ton of discussion of the politics at play here, especially since David Ellison wrote a pretty scathing New York Times column this week arguing that the states just don't want him to own cnn. But there's been less discussion of the actual legal issues at play here. So that's today's show. Eric Gardner is here. He writes about the law in Hollywood for Puck and he's been following this case pretty closely. We're going to talk about how it might play out, the key players, what this trial date means, the lawsuit that Warner's filed to keep his executives from jumping ship, and most importantly, when will this whole thing actually end? From the ringer and Puck, I'm Matt Bellany and this is the Town. All right, we are here with Eric Gardner, my colleague at Puck and legal expert and reader of all of the documents that have Been filed far in the paramount, Warner Brothers, California, 11 state litigation. Welcome, Eric.
- [02:54]
B
Thanks for having me.
- [02:55]
A
Did I overstate the number of documents you've read? You haven't read everything?
- [02:59]
B
I've read everything three times. At least three times.
- [03:02]
A
Nice. Okay, good. All right. Well, you. My point is you're reading this stuff closer than. More closely than I am. And I wanted to get your assessment of the case so far because we've discussed it with Lucas and others and a lot is going on here. We now I feel like we have a solidified procedural disposition. This case is going to trial in March unless it's delayed, which I don't think it will be. And we have a 12 day trial. We have the lawyers on both sides lining up and we have Paramount. The perception is that this has not been going great for them. So first of all, do you agree with that?
- [03:45]
B
I think they took a bit of a gamble by agreeing to delay a hearing and to kind of waive the preliminary injunction issue and go straight to trial. And so far that bet is not looking so hot.
- [03:59]
A
No. They wanted November, the state AGs wanted April, they got March. So much more on the side of the ags, certainly.
- [04:09]
B
Yeah.
- [04:10]
A
But, you know, they said from the beginning we want time to litigate this and to present all the facts. And now they're gonna have plenty of time to do their depositions and to seek documents and to prepare their experts. And this case will, I think, be a really interesting window into the state of Hollywood in 2027.
- [04:33]
B
Oh, yeah, absolutely. I mean, there'll be executives across the industry that will be testifying. We're going to see data about the industry like none other. There'll be experts that will come forward and testify about exactly the state of the industry. Who's the real competition here. This is certainly going to be a broad canvas about how this industry operates and the health of it and kind of what's coming up on the, you know, on the back end of things. You know, we haven't really talked a lot in this case about AI yet, but I'm sure that that will be part of the defense too. So. So this is definitely going to be, you know, a take the temperature of the industry type of case.
- [05:18]
A
Yeah, I talked to one of the theater owners recently and they made a really interesting point here because they were saying it's not just the market power that the combined Paramount, Warner Brothers is going to have in these negotiations for film rental prices, it's all the others. When you take out a buyer, when you take out A competitor, all of the players get more leverage. In these discussions, Disney is probably looking at this and saying, if there are 5, 6 competitors for opening weekends and then you take one away, we, as Disney get more leverage and we can ask for more. So they're looking at this from the broader perspective of how taking out a competitor in the market is going to impact all of their business.
- [06:03]
B
Yeah, and that's why a lot of these statistics when it comes to markets, you know, measure stuff like concentration and like what share of the market, you know, a single dominant company has, because that, you know, has direct impact on their leverage and their ability to kind of dictate terms when it comes to licensing. And you're right, it has, has, you know, some immeasurable effects on some of the other companies that are in the market as well now. Makes it harder for lesser companies to come in and get the same. But that's why the merger is also happening, because David Ellison says that he needs scale to compete with Netflix. So it works kind of both ways.
- [06:48]
A
This lead lawyer, Jeffrey Weinberger, he's gone up against the lead lawyer for the Paramount Coalition, Beth Wilkinson. They went up against each other in the Microsoft Activision case and she won. She got that deal essentially through. And now we can argue about whether that was a beneficial deal or not. But what do you know about this lead lawyer for Paramount, Beth Wilkinson, Fascinating figure. She seems to be now involved in almost every big industry case. She's in the Tenga nexstar merger. She's representing Disney in this SEC fight they have with the government. She was involved in the NCAA litigation that led to athletes having much more rights there. She did the infamous Dan Snyder report for the Washington Commanders that got him fired.
- [07:37]
B
Yeah, I mean, I think her real specialty is trials, though, and that's why she was brought on board as soon as Paramount made the decision that they were going to go to trial. They brought in Beth because she is an expert when it comes to kind of the nuances of handling a trial, of guiding witnesses to testify, of cross examination of procedure and all that. But they have a slate of many different lawyers and it's.
- [08:07]
A
They do. Okay, so I want you to explain to people because they don't really realize this, okay? Beth Wilkinson, Jeffrey Kessler, David Gelfand, Paul Clement, these are all a list lawyers. And they bring their entire firm and apparatus and 20 different associates with them. These are all also $2,000 an hour, $2,500 an hour lawyers. How much is Paramount going to spend per month on this case? It's crazy estimate ballpark.
- [08:41]
B
I mean, they're probably spending, you know, 10, $20 million a week on this. I mean, it's. It's just.
- [08:47]
A
No, no, no, that can't be that much. But, like, when I was a. When I was a litigator, the estimate was you spend a million dollars a month if you go to trial. That was 20 years ago.
- [08:57]
B
Right? I. I mean, they are. They are sparing no expense.
- [09:00]
A
They've already said they've spent a hundred million dollars on legal fees.
- [09:03]
B
Yeah, I mean, and it's gonna. It's gonna grow. I mean, it's funny. I mean, just how much legal talent they've amassed for this. It's like you're getting a divorce. You speak to every divorce attorney in town, so you're soon to be ex can't have their own. And it's almost like they're collecting antitrust superstars, Matt.
- [09:25]
C
They're almost like your Dodgers bringing in Scubal.
- [09:28]
A
It is the Dodgers. They are the Dodgers of antitrust lawyers. And they're going up against the Tampa Bay Rays of the state attorney generals. The assistant attorney general probably makes what, 200, 300,000 a year?
- [09:43]
B
Yeah, probably. Maybe a little more, but not that much more.
- [09:47]
A
Oh, God. Hilarious. I know. And then there's still no guarantee they're going to win. All right, so I want to talk about the timing here, because that's the big issue. You got this trial set for March. The ticking fees are going to kick in October 1st, so 650 million every quarter. You've also got this June 4th deadline. If they don't close this deal by June 4th, our guy, David Zaslav at Warner Discovery, he can cancel the deal, take a $7 billion termination fee and figure out what to do next with his company. Maybe go forward with the split that he wanted. He never liked the Ellisons, never wanted to sell to them. He said that he preferred Netflix from the beginning. Ultimately, he had to sell to the Ellisons because they offered more money. But is David Zaslav sitting there counting the days until he gets to put this company up for sale again, or is he going to make some deal with them? And he knows that his stock price is going to crater if the deal falls apart, and he's so pregnant with this deal now that he wants it to close? And he will get his $800 million, and this is. He will do whatever it takes to get Warner Discovery sold here.
- [11:05]
B
I expect he'll get a call before the June 4 outside day comes up. You know, they'll want to amend the agreement so that they have some more time. And the question is, really, what's he going to demand for that? I mean, he could at least demand higher ticking fees, less restrictions, you know, maybe a bonus for himself.
- [11:28]
A
A bonus for himself? We know that's what it's going to be. Yeah, yeah, he'll get the plane, he'll get some bonus, he'll get his kids summer camp bought by, you know, some patron of the Ellisons. Something will happen.
- [11:40]
B
I mean, the other, the other thing that could happen is that, you know, this just all plays out and the closer we get to into the date, his leverage goes up. You know, who knows? Maybe we'll see Netflix reenter the picture, like, start making noise about how they might re enter bidding. I mean, they couldn't beat Ellison's offer the first time, but, you know, with, you know, the $7 billion termination fee difference, and if it looks like the merger is going to be blocked, they could make a credible case that it would be the best fiduciary duty of David Zaslav to take, you know, their deal.
- [12:22]
A
So no guarantee, by the way, that the government wouldn't try to block that as well.
- [12:25]
B
Oh, yeah, of course, of course. But we're just talking about, about David Zaslav's position here and, you know, what he might want. And I expect that some of this will be worked out beforehand, before it even gets to June 4th.
- [12:41]
A
And because of the delay, are they going to have to go back to some of these regulatory bodies that have approved the merger and, and reopen the case? There's been some chatter about how in January, February, they will have to file additional paperwork and get. And basically re approve this deal. What's going on there?
- [13:01]
B
Yeah, I mean, this was from Paramount's own words, you know, when they were trying to make the case that this trial should happen in November rather than April. You know, they made the point that if the deal doesn't close by February, by, I think, like the week after the super bowl, they have to resubmit their paperwork to the DOJ and that they have to resubmit paperwork throughout regulatory bodies across the world. So, yeah, I mean, there's nothing to lead me to believe that the outcome will be different, but it's just a big hassle for them. And, and if there are political regimes that have changed around the world, who knows, like, maybe, maybe they'll, you know, there'll be some minds that have changed.
- [13:49]
A
Well, we're having an election in November.
- [13:52]
B
Right.
- [13:52]
A
So the contours of the US Congress could change.
- [13:56]
B
Yeah. And honestly, I think that's been one of the under, you know, discussed points like why did Paramount want this trial to happen in November? Well, if you look at what they've been talking about this past week. Oh, this is all political. Well, what is happening in November? The midterms are happening in November. So maybe they thought that we'd get past the midterms and the political temperature would cool and then that the states would drop their case. That's one theory that I've been banding about in my mind the last few days.
- [14:27]
A
Well, or the Democrats get more power in Washington and are more emboldened to, to hold hearings or make this a much bigger deal now that they get a little bit of power.
- [14:39]
B
Well, I think one of the things that's gonna happen is the environment around this merger changes. I almost think that how this is gonna play out has less to do with the merger itself and the procedural posture of this case and some of the other stuff that's happening around this, whether it's the politics and who holds the levers of control, you know, whether, you know, AGs are feeling their oats or whether they feel like they need to, you know, step up in the vacuum of less, you know, federal intervention, whether it's, you know, the jobs front, whether it's, you know, the, the industry's health, you know, you know, the box office, you know, I think that there's a lot of things.
- [15:29]
A
Yeah, we've talked about that. Things could change a lot in this industry in six, seven months. And we're also going to get a new governor. I mean, there's been some reporting in the Journal that Gavin Newsom, the current governor, doesn't like that Paramount is being challenged here. But we don't know what Javier Becerra, the incoming likely governor, is going to say about this stuff.
- [15:49]
B
Yeah, absolutely. So I think that, you know, basically, you know, not much is going to change in terms of, you know, whether this merger is anti competitive or not. Yeah, they'll be collecting evidence and going through discovery and all that. But, you know, some of the kind of environment, the weather around, around this case may change.
- [16:08]
A
Yeah. Speaking of strategy, what did you think of Ellison's big New York Times piece, his op ed where he paints himself as Mr. Down the middle, just trying to get his big merger done. He's going to be a responsible steward of CBS News and CNN and everybody should just calm down and let this deal go through.
- [16:29]
B
Yeah, I just don't think it's going to have that much of an impact. Maybe he got tired of, you know, there were some op ed, you know, going the other way a week or two ago.
- [16:39]
A
Oh, yeah. I mean, and he's had his surrogates out there, Ari Emanuel, Adam Aaron, our guy. And my take on this is I thought it was smart, you know, to do that, to at least put it out there that this is, in my view, a political witch hunt. Now, obviously he created the political situation here by jumping into bed with Trump and going all in on that and, you know, sitting next to him at the UFC match and everything that he did that caused the Democrats to be outraged by this. And what he didn't mention in the op ed is his actions since he's owned CBS News have not been down the middle. He put Bari Weiss in charge of CBS News and she is an open ideologue. She is very pro Israel. She has very strong political beliefs that she has espoused both in her New York Times column and at the free press. So Mr. Down the middle has shown himself to be kind of not down the middle in his hiring here. That was not mentioned.
- [17:42]
B
Yeah, I don't know about this strategy. I think that if it is about politics, then maybe the best reaction is to kind of lay low and cool the temperature a little bit. If it is about politics, though, maybe the strategy is to rile up, you know, D.C. the Republicans in D.C. so that maybe they start talking about, you know, federal preemption of state ag actions and stuff like that.
- [18:12]
A
Well, and if this is all about CNN and you have the state of California and these 11 states trying to prevent somebody from owning a particular news outlet, that's a First Amendment issue. It really is. Like if the government should not be able to dictate who has the power over a news network. Right?
- [18:33]
B
Yeah.
- [18:34]
A
At least for speech related reasons. If there are legitimate antitrust or legitimate business reasons for it, fine. But if this truly is, this is obviously why he did this op ed, if this truly is a politically motivated action to prevent a Trump aligned billionaire from owning cnn, that's a First Amendment issue in my view.
- [18:57]
B
Absolutely. But there's, you know, I think that CNN and who controls it is certainly a factor, maybe a key factor in what we're seeing, but it's not the only factor. And so they're playing it up and I understand the strategy for doing that, but I think that the states will say that this isn't just about cnn.
- [19:22]
A
Yeah, well, they already have. And you know, whether we believe them is another matter that's for the judge. This episode is brought to you by Accenture. When your advertising operations fall out of sync, campaigns slow down, insights get buried and opportunities get missed. That's why Spotify and Accenture are working together to reinvent the rhythm of ad sales using automation, analytics and smarter workflows to simplify campaign delivery and and access better data across the business. The result? Less time spent on operations, more time connecting brands with the moments and fandoms that matter most. To learn more, check out Accenture.com this episode is brought to you by Netflix. Presenting Beef now nominated for 16 Emmy Awards, including Outstanding Limited or Anthology Series, Esquire raves it's hands down the best TV show of the year from Emmy nominated creator, writer and director Lee Seung Jin, starring Emmy nominated lead actor Oscar Isaac, lead actress Carey Mulligan, supporting actor Charles Melton and supporting actress Yoon Ye Jung. IGN hails it a masterpiece. Lee Seung Jin's series remains an untouchable force. Beef, the most nominated limited series of
- [20:33]
D
the year right now get up to 15% off select storage solutions put heavy duty HDX totes to good use, protecting what's important to you. The solid impact resistant design prevents cracking and the clear base insides make items easy to find even when the totes are stacked. Find select shelving and tote storage up to 15% off at the Home Depot. To organize every room in your home from your garage to your attic, visit homedevo.com how doers get more done
- [21:04]
A
Spotify all right, so you wrote a piece for Puck this past week about what's going on. As we all wait for this to happen, which is everyone in town is in limbo. Everyone's thinking. I've talked to people constantly. What's going to happen to my job? What's going to happen to my company? I see my counterpart at Paramount. I know that that person is aligned with Ellison. They're probably going to take my job and people are looking elsewhere. And we had Amazon get sued by our guy David Zaslav in Warner Discovery because they hired an HBO marketing executive. And there were others as well. I know they went after Franny, who runs the content at hbo. They went after a bunch of other people and this to me was a warning shot. Don't you dare try to break your contract before this deal closes. We are looking and we will sue if you do that.
- [22:04]
B
Yeah, I think that these people tend to be overlooked in the whole process. We tend to kind of think of this as kind of a news story about the merger without necessarily Thinking about the people involved. There are people who are working at this company that are wondering whether they will still have a job in a year's time.
- [22:26]
A
Of course, I mean I went to, I hung out with a friend of mine who's a Warner's exec last week and she was saying the exact same thing. Everybody's, everybody is speculating as to what's going to happen. And now that we have this delay, it's just like more uncertainty. Why shouldn't they be able to jump around what is the current state of the law on non competes and breaching your contract to jump to a rival in California?
- [22:53]
B
So this is a, it is a really kind of tricky issue because in California it's very anti non compete, it's very, you know, employee friendly, it likes the mobility. But that being said, there have been some courts in the past few years
- [23:10]
A
that, yeah, the Fox Netflix case, they found that the contract you have, if it's a fixed term and you are an executive at a entertainment company, you have to stick to your fixed term contract.
- [23:21]
B
Right. But it can't be a one sided fixed term contract. It can't just be, you have to stay here and we can fire you if you want at some point. So it has to be like a bargain. You're getting security, you sign that deal for four years, you know you're going to be paid for four years no matter what. You know, some companies have tried to get away with, you know, you agreed to stay here for four years but we can fire you whenever we want
- [23:50]
A
and those are not okay.
- [23:52]
B
Right, right.
- [23:53]
A
So everybody should be looking at their contract today to find out what it actually says.
- [24:00]
B
So when it comes to this merger, there's a lot of things going on here. One is that the merger agreement itself, which I pointed out in my Puck story, kind of compels Warner Brothers to enforce these restrictions. They, Paramount believes that it's buying a certain workforce.
- [24:18]
A
They don't want everybody with one foot out the door.
- [24:20]
B
Exactly. You know, so, so if Amazon starts, you know, recruiting and poaching their employees, you're right that this is a warning signal to, to everyone else. Don't, don't even dare try to, to, you know, poach executives from, from us.
- [24:36]
A
I think it's a wuss move. Yeah, I think it's a wuss move. You know what? You know, it's also good for keeping employees retention bonuses, but it's hard for
- [24:46]
B
them to do anything in the midst of this merger because their future corporate parent is coming in. But they can't exert any control. They can't really adjust too much compensation and all that. So it's a really difficult situation. And I guess one of the reasons why Paramount wanted this trial to happen sooner rather than later was because there are so many people who are wondering about the future. So that's probably their best point about why things should move.
- [25:23]
A
I know. And it sucks for Peter Friedlander at Amazon. He's the head of tv, and he was trying to build a team and going after great people that are at this company that is just subject to chaos all the time. And he couldn't hire the people he wanted, so he had to promote from within.
- [25:38]
B
Yeah, yeah, absolutely. I mean, I think that everyone should be able to work wherever they want.
- [25:43]
A
And then again, you do sign a contract. I don't. I don't want to, like, you sign
- [25:46]
B
a contract with one company, but then. Then another company comes on, and there's no guarantee that you're going to, you know, work there in the future. So at that point, I think. I don't know.
- [25:57]
A
There's no loyalty. Everybody will screw you. Get what you can while you can. That is my philosophy. All right, so everybody keeps asking me, and I'm sure you get this all the time. How long is this going to go? What's going to happen? Is there going to be a settlement? Like, give me your state of the. The. The case and the posture right now.
- [26:18]
B
Okay, well, you know, like I said, I think that the settlements could. Could kind of turn on stuff that happens. Nothing inside the case itself. It could turn on the law. Right. One. One thing that I haven't seen many people point out is this integration with. With the Writer's Guild case, because let's say the states decide that they will accept a CNN divestiture and they will settle with Paramount and everything like that. Well, the Writers Guild case is still going forward, and the stipulation kind of covers them. The injunction covers them. So that really complicates a settlement here.
- [27:01]
A
So it's got to be a global settlement. That makes the Writers Guild happy, too.
- [27:05]
B
Yeah, it really does. And so Paramount finds themselves in a precarious position here because it's getting very late in the calendar, and they have to negotiate with multiple different parties here.
- [27:20]
A
But the Writers Guild can't stop a merger.
- [27:23]
B
Well, right now, they agreed to kind of.
- [27:27]
A
Oh, they agreed because they agreed to consolidate the cases because of the stipulation.
- [27:32]
B
They agreed that they wouldn't consummate the merger until five days after a merits decision in both these cases, not just the state AG case, but the Writers Guild case as well. So when everyone starts talking about the states potentially settling it, what they're missing is the fact that the riders, too have a big say in what's going to happen here and so nobody should forget them. That being said, it would not surprise me if there is a settlement down the line.
- [28:07]
A
Plus, we don't know how long these decisions are going to take. That's the crazy part. This judge could sit on the matter for a couple weeks and then if Paramount doesn't like the result that they get, they have to appeal. It has to be taken by the ninth Circuit. They have to hear argument, they have to issue their ruling. This could go on a year.
- [28:27]
B
Yeah, I mean, that's the crazy part for me. You know, it's not the fact that they delayed this thing. It's that they can't really guarantee, like, how fast the judicial process happens. I mean, once the judge rules, I'm sure there's going to be all sorts of emergency motions. You know, it might actually get to the Supreme Court much quicker than people think.
- [28:48]
A
And do you think the Supreme Court would be inclined to take this case?
- [28:52]
B
Well, I think they're going to have to make a decision one way or another on the emergency motion whether to stay the judgment or not.
- [28:59]
A
But they take so few cases.
- [29:02]
B
Right, right. But what I'm saying is that there could be a decision on the so called shadow docket. Even if the case isn't addressed on its merits or the big issues, there might be a decision there right away whether to stay the judgment. That being said, this is a big case. I certainly could see the Supreme Court taking it. But the question is, how fast is this going to move? The trial's going to happen in March. The judge has hardly guaranteed that she will come out with a decision the following month.
- [29:41]
A
She seems to not really care that the Ellisons are having to pay a billion dollars before this trial even starts.
- [29:48]
B
Yeah, like I said, like I joked in my column, you know, this is not Monopoly money. This is real money going.
- [29:54]
A
I know, but you know what? Like I, I've been before, judges that do not care about the money being spent on either side, that's not their. It's just not their job. Their job is to adjudicate, and if they feel that it takes a certain amount of time, they're going to take it. So, Eric, you've read all the papers. Like, give me your assessment of the arguments. Do you think this is an appropriate definition of three markets in Hollywood.
- [30:21]
B
I'm certainly a little bit skeptical of the markets that I see defined here. It does seem a stretch, kind of borderline case here. It's not surprising to me that a lot of other jurisdictions kind of passed on making a challenge here so the states have a job in front of them in terms of, you know, convincing the judge that these are real markets and that, you know, they haven't left anyone out and that there are, you know, bad competitive effects to, you know, what we see here. Right now. I'm a little, kind of iffy on the merits case of the side, but we'll see. We'll see. I mean, I have an open mind about it too.
- [31:06]
A
It'll be hilarious if they bring in the heads of Amazon's film studio and Lionsgate's film studio to talk about their massive big budget hits this year. Project Hail Mary and Michael to go in and they'll get to brag in front of all of Hollywood. We made a billion dollar movie. We're Lionsgate.
- [31:26]
B
Yeah. I think part of the promotional tour for any actor might be getting on, getting involved in this trial and patting themselves on the back.
- [31:35]
A
That's a good idea. Everyone should be calling their publicists. How do get me into this trial? Everybody's gonna be watching.
- [31:42]
B
Exactly.
- [31:43]
A
Thank you, Eric.
- [31:44]
B
My pleasure.
- [31:47]
A
We are back with the call sheet. Craig, where are you on Ted Lasso? I don't think we've ever discussed Ted Lasso on this show.
- [31:53]
C
I watched season one in the Pandemic. I enjoyed it, and then I kind of fell off in season two once we got out of the Pandemic. It's just like a little too. It's a little too sweet and hopeful for my dead heart.
- [32:05]
A
Yeah, I was in on the first two seasons, and then by the third, it's just like, what is going on here? The episodes were so long, it stopped being a comedy. It was just all about trying to make you cry. Like, not for me, but a lot of people are into Ted Lasso.
- [32:20]
C
Yes.
- [32:21]
A
It was shocking. In 2023, I remember this. Ted Lasso was the number one streaming original in all of streaming in the U.S. first time a Netflix show was not number one. It got to 16.9 billion minutes viewed, according to Nielsen, and kind of amazing. I mean, Jason Sudeikis said they were going to end the show there. Amazingly, a year or two later, he had an epiphany that he had another idea for season four that may have coincided with a dump truck of money being backed up to his house.
- [33:01]
C
Yeah. Now he's back. Ted Lasso is back to, I believe, coach women's team now in England.
- [33:06]
A
Yes, Reviews came out today. Not great.
- [33:10]
C
Oh, really? Is that right?
- [33:11]
A
Yeah, the reviews have not been good. I had heard. I had heard from people at the studio. It's made by Warner Brothers. They are also very interested. And NBC gets sort of a passive interest in it because, remember, Ted Lasso was a character that popped up on NBC Sports. So they get free money from Ted Lasso because of that. But I had heard that it wasn't great and that everybody was just sort of going through the motions to get Apple another season. But they got it, and it's here and it's going to be big. The question is, is it going to be the biggest show of 2026? What say you? Over under on 16.9 billion minutes views.
- [33:52]
C
That's such a. That number means nothing to me. I feel like I haven't. We're not deep enough into, like, the streaming world where, like, those numbers mean anything. And it's also. How is it really measured? It's 16 billion views and how. And how long?
- [34:04]
A
Yeah, there are actually two different questions for the year it would be. But there's two different questions because obviously we're at a different place in the streaming wars this year than we were in 2023. So 16.9 billion minutes views may not be the biggest show of the year. In fact, for the first half of the year, Nielsen said that Stranger Things was the biggest show of the year.
- [34:23]
C
Well, your question is basically, will season four outperform season three?
- [34:26]
A
That is ultimately my question, and my. My prediction is no. I think that season three turned off a lot of people and it'll be big. It'll probably be the number one show on Apple by a long margin. But I do not think that season four will match season three.
- [34:42]
C
I probably would agree with you. I don't know. Maybe the World cup is going to help Americans fall back in love with soccer and they're going to want to dive back into Ted Lasso.
- [34:50]
A
They definitely got Sudeikis into the World cup conversation. Query whether they paid for that placement during the halftime show. Not sure about that one, but I just feel like, you know, we've seen decay on these shows across the board this year. Lots of shows have not performed up to their previous seasons, and there's just not as much goodwill. Also, it's been three years. People kind of forget. The only thing. The only thing on the other side is that Ted Lasso is remarkably durable on Apple. It is still Even before this new season, it was still in the top 10, like years after it premiered.
- [35:27]
C
Yeah, it's a real cult. People who love Ted Lasso really love Ted Lasso. Even if it maybe doesn't reach the levels of season three, I bet you it'll be close.
- [35:36]
A
Maybe. And now they've got more episodes. The way Nielsen judges things, things, they go all of the show, they judge all the show. So it was, you know, 24 episodes before.
- [35:45]
C
I believe you mean 24 total.
- [35:47]
A
24 total, yeah. Maybe people will rediscover their the, you know, the first seasons or rewatch it. So I don't know. But I think that this season will not match the previous season, but it will probably be top 10 for the year.
- [36:01]
C
Yeah, I agree.
- [36:02]
A
All right, that's the show for the day. I want to thank my guest, Eric Gardner, producer Craig Horbeck, artist Jesse Lopez and Stephano Sanchez. And I want to thank you. We'll see you one more time. This week.
- [36:15]
D
Athletic Brewing Company crafts award winning non alcoholic beers for those who want to be part of every round. With over 185 flavor awards, they're exceptional NA beers that fit your lifestyle and any social occasion. Summer's full of good times and Athletic fits right in. Go to athletic brewing.com to have brews delivered to your door or find them at a bar, restaurant or store near you. Near Beer Athletic Brewing Co. Fit for all times.