Table of Contents

1. Key Highlights:
2. Introduction
3. Why the Paramount–WBD deal feels different
4. What buyers saw and heard at the screenings
5. Studio strategies: positioning content for a tighter market
6. The international buyer’s balancing act
7. The economics: budgets, ad markets and bargaining power
8. Creative consequences: what might change for series and movies
9. Organizational fallout and distribution duplication
10. What will still travel: content types buyers should prioritize
11. Practical playbook for buyers and producers
12. Scenarios to watch over the next buying seasons
13. The broader industry implications
14. A measured outlook
15. FAQ

Key Highlights:

• Paramount’s proposed acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery for $110 billion could reduce the number of studio vendors at future LA Screenings, compress competition and reconfigure distribution windows.
• Studios pitched a mix of returning series, co-productions and marquee franchises to reassure buyers; international partners are leaning harder into co-productions and negotiating clearer digital windows.
• Buyers face a tighter ad market and constrained budgets; survival strategies include prioritizing annual returners, securing digital rights, and expanding co-productions.

Introduction

The annual pilgrimage to the studios around Los Angeles has long been a ritual for international content buyers: a week of screenings, relationship-building and deal-making that sets the programming calendars for broadcasters and streamers worldwide. This year that ritual unfolded against the backdrop of seismic corporate activity. Paramount’s intention to acquire Warner Bros. Discovery (WBD) for roughly $110 billion has injected a fresh layer of uncertainty into an already competitive market. Executives arriving at LAX were not only planning which shows to watch; they were assessing how one giant studio swallowing another might alter buying patterns, content availability, and distribution rhythms for years to come.

Hollywood has seen major consolidations before. Buyers who weathered Disney’s absorption of Fox’s entertainment assets recall how once-independent vendors vanished from the marketplace, forcing buyers to reroute relationships and adjust acquisition strategies. The difference this time extends beyond who sits on the selling roster. The combination of two studios with deep, overlapping catalogs and duplicated sales and distribution infrastructure raises substantive questions: which teams remain, which titles shift behind a proprietorial app, and how will global buyers — from free-to-air channels to subscription platforms — respond when the supply of licensed U.S. content tightens?

Studio executives at the screenings aimed to tamp down anxiety. Warner and Paramount sellers emphasized continuity, offering returning series, new event shows and international co-productions as proof they still want to do business globally. Buyers, however, arrived with wariness shaped by recent market realities: a depressed global TV ad market, lean acquisition budgets, and an increasing preference for shorter, exclusive content that drives subscriptions. Those tensions framed conversations across Burbank, Culver City and studios beyond, where the immediate task remains the same — find programming that cuts through local markets while planning for a future whose contours are rapidly changing.

This report synthesizes what buyers and studios revealed on the lot, examines the potential market shifts a merger would trigger, and outlines practical strategies for content buyers and sellers navigating the next phase of global television licensing.

Why the Paramount–WBD deal feels different

Consolidation in Hollywood is not new. What sets the Paramount–WBD scenario apart is the sheer scale and the specific overlaps between the two companies. Both possess expansive libraries, major broadcast relationships, globally recognized franchises and substantial distribution teams. The likely consequence is not simply a larger catalog but redundancies across sales, distribution and marketing functions. Buyers already accustomed to the fallout from earlier mergers expect personnel reshuffles and, crucially, fewer studio "stalls" at the next screenings.

Several buyers described the outcome candidly: duplication, particularly in distribution, is almost guaranteed to mean one entire team “leaving.” The implication extends to the buying ecosystem. With fewer independent sellers, competitive tension — the force that drives bidding wars for premium titles — may dull. That could push studios to adjust pricing, or conversely, protect flagship IP for proprietary platforms and limit the number of territories pitched to third parties.

Another point of divergence lies in strategy. David Ellison, associated with the prospective combined entity, has touted ambitious production targets — a pledge to produce 30 movies a year. Ambition on that scale creates tension between volume and discernment. Buyers worry that a focus on high output could dilute attention on mid-tier series that historically found robust global homes. At the same time, commercial logic may push the combined studio to prioritize tentpole franchises and returning network series that reliably attract advertisers and international buyers.

The potential for increased content behind a Paramount–Warner consumer app also animates buyer concerns. Where previously shows might be licensed globally, buyers now contemplate losing access to top-tier series as studios reserve premieres or extended windows for their own streaming services. That scenario recalls earlier waves of "first-window" retention by streamers, but on an amplified scale when two studios with major tentpole IP consolidate control.

What buyers saw and heard at the screenings

Studio pitches this year leaned into reassurance and clarity. Warner Bros. Discovery’s global content president framed the event as “business as usual,” emphasizing the studio’s willingness to work with both ad-supported and streaming buyers. The slate featured notable items designed to show breadth: DC Universe material such as Lanterns, new comedy threads connecting Larry David with high-profile guests (including an improbable pairing with President Barack Obama), and returning series aimed at maintaining annual momentum.

Paramount’s lot offered a network-driven slate: legal drama Cupertino, vampire comedy Eternally Yours, procedural entries linked to CBS including NCIS: New York, and The F Ward — an international co-production with Australian platform Stan starring Anna Friel. Paramount’s focus underlined the continued relevance of network tentpoles for international buyers who prize predictable audience draws.

Sony Pictures Television (SPT) seized the moment to underscore independence. Co-presidents highlighted the studio’s position outside the broadcast network-mandated structures as a selling point, presenting the company as a reliable “arms dealer” for buyers looking to plug content gaps. Sony’s screenings included the high-visibility return of Jeopardy! and Wheel of Fortune after legal disputes over international rights concluded, plus drama offerings like Jon Hamm’s American Hostage and Glenn Close’s Up to No Good.

NBCUniversal’s message centered on range: event series, franchise extensions, comedies and broad commercial dramas all packaged within a single portfolio. The message recognized a buyer preference emerging over the last seasons — fewer, bigger shows that travel internationally and slates that offer both global event television and reliable commercial product.

Buyers spoke of a market with less product on offer, even as certain studios stocked their catalogs more robustly. Some acquisitions executives described the volume of available titles as constrained; others suggested the mix had changed, with shorter-run and limited series gaining prominence. The differences were most acute when considering the types of rights buyers now demand: digital windows have become essential bargaining chips, and deals that omit streaming rights often struggle to close.

Studio strategies: positioning content for a tighter market

Studios tailored pitches around three intersecting priorities: annual returnability, franchise strength, and international co-production teeth.

• Annual returners as a selling point. Warner framed the “return of the returning series” as a strategic advantage. Returning shows with annual cycles reduce viewer attrition and provide regular inventory for buyers and advertisers. Shows that come back on an annual clip are easier to monetize repeatedly and create dependable scheduling blocks for linear and streaming platforms alike.
• Franchise and IP leverage. Franchises — Friends, The Big Bang Theory, Harry Potter, and the expanding DC Universe — remain the anchor of global sales. These properties have cross-demographic reach and serve as premium inventory for both free-to-air channels that rely on proven ratings drivers and subscription services seeking subscriber retention.
• Co-productions and local partnerships. The presence of The F Ward on Paramount’s slate illustrates how international co-productions have become indispensable. For buyers in markets like Australia and Canada, locally relevant co-productions help balance costs and secure stronger promotional integration. Stan’s content strategy underscores this: a curated mix of U.S. acquisitions, originals and co-productions tuned to local tastes. Crave’s secure positioning for HBO Max content in Canada demonstrates the importance of contract clarity around territorial rights, especially where third-party streamers currently carry major U.S. content.

Studios also used the screenings to demonstrate reliability to buyers in two ways. First, by showing established returning series that guarantee audience continuity. Second, by signaling an openness to work with both free-to-air buyers and streamers, affirming that licensing remains a viable revenue stream even as studios build or protect their own direct-to-consumer outlets.

The international buyer’s balancing act

International buyers juggle multiple constraints: demographic differences, regulatory windows, budgets, and the imperative to secure both global hits and locally tailored catalogues. Conversations on the lots revealed several consistent buyer priorities.

• Digital rights now matter as much as linear rights. Buyers increasingly demand deals that include digital or streaming rights. Some network series that once sold easily for linear slots are now harder to license without accompanying digital windows. This shift reflects audience habits: even older demos are migrating to streaming platforms, giving additional value to content with digital replay potential.
• Co-productions reduce exposure and increase leverage. Co-productions allow buyers to obtain first-run rights and deepen creative involvement, often securing better terms. They also create content that is inherently more likely to resonate locally because of cultural and casting choices. Stan’s approach — maintaining originals and co-productions alongside acquisitions — exemplifies how to balance global prestige with local relevance.
• Holdbacks and second windows create negotiation friction. Disney’s tendency to offer second windows with holdbacks of roughly a year is attractive financially but can be reputationally awkward for buyers who prefer to advertise first-run exclusivity. Buyers weigh the cost savings of delayed windows against audience expectations and brand positioning.
• Annual returners and event series win advertisers. For ad-supported platforms, the reliability of returning series matters. Annual returns reinvigorate advertising slots and boost planning stability. Buyers with weaker ad budgets, however, might prefer limited-run prestige shows that create event-like subscription spikes rather than sustained ad inventory.
• Market-specific commitments matter. Buyers in territories like Canada and Australia emphasize the necessity of ironclad contract language. Bell Media’s VP of Global Content confirmed their Crave deal’s wording provides stability in the near term. That clarity is increasingly valuable as rights ownership across regions becomes more contested.

Real-world example: Canada’s Crave carrying HBO Max content shows how local incumbents can protect their positions. When HBO Max launched and shuffled rights, Canada’s Bell negotiated language to ensure continuity. Should a combined Paramount–WBD decide to reconfigure global windows, the fate of similar third-party deals will pivot on contract specifics and the timing of renewals.

The economics: budgets, ad markets and bargaining power

Two economic realities frame the current buying season: a depressed TV ad market and constrained acquisition budgets. Those pressures reshape negotiations and influence how studios package their offers.

• Ad depression tightens purses. Buyers repeatedly noted that the global TV advertising market remains soft. Ad-dependent broadcasters have less cash for content, leaving them more selective. For streamers reliant on subscription ARPU (average revenue per user), the calculus differs but still converges on selective buying and an emphasis on content that can be marketed for acquisition or retention.
• Limited supply intensifies bidding where premium IP exists. With fewer studio vendors post-merger, competition for A-list shows could become fiercer. Conversely, studios may be willing to retain more of their marquee titles for their own platforms, reducing the number of true “must-have” items in the marketplace.
• Pricing dynamics may bifurcate. Either prices for the remaining available premium content could rise due to scarcity, or studios could pull content behind paywalls, reducing available inventory and putting downward pressure on pricing for mid-tier shows. Both outcomes make forecasting more challenging for buyers reliant on linear scheduling.
• Smaller buyers feel the pinch. Public broadcasters and smaller commercial channels often lack the budgets to compete with global streamers. Their strategies increasingly include early-window co-productions or licensing older seasons of returning series rather than bidding on premiere rights.

Negotiation example: Negotiations over digital rights have become a tipping point in deals. A buyer who secured both linear and streaming windows for a returning franchise retains better long-term value than one who licenses only linear rights. Studios that understand that dynamic tailor offers to extract premium fees for digital exclusivity, while buyers push back by threatening to take budgets to alternative suppliers or invest in originals.

Creative consequences: what might change for series and movies

Mergers reshape more than corporate charts; they shape greenlighting, commissioning, and the lifecycle of content.

• Fewer, bigger bets. With combined resources, a merged studio may prioritize tentpoles and globally marketable franchises. Big-budget movies and event series that promise global reach could become a larger share of output, while mid-budget films and niche series face pressure.
• Annual returns favored over gap-year hiatuses. Studios emphasized the value of series returning annually. That rhythm benefits buyers, advertisers and audience retention. Where a merged studio can enforce production discipline, some shows may convert to tighter annual cycles to sustain momentum and global licensing value.
• Pipeline pressure on creatives. An emphasis on volume targets — such as pledges to increase film output — creates more greenlights but not necessarily more attention per project. Creators worry that the focus on scale could shorten development cycles and reduce experimental or borderline projects that historically found life at medium-sized studios.
• International co-productions rise. Greater uncertainty in U.S. rights encourages buyers to invest in co-productions that guarantee local first-run rights and deeper integration. Co-productions can mitigate supply risk and create content with intrinsic cross-border appeal.

Case in point: The F Ward’s appearance on Paramount’s slate demonstrates how bridging international talent (Anna Friel) and local production partners (Stan in Australia) produces content that travels while satisfying domestic commissioning requirements. It’s the kind of hybrid that will become more desirable for buyers seeking security and differentiation.

Organizational fallout and distribution duplication

Practical operational consequences of the merger would materialize quickly in duplicated teams and overlapping functions. Distribution and sales units are prime targets for consolidation. Buyers expect personnel changes that will alter points of contact and potentially slow deal flow during transition.

• Consolidation of distribution teams. Both studios maintain distribution infrastructures; merging them would eliminate redundancy. For buyers accustomed to strong personal relationships with sales executives, that means fewer faces on the lot and potentially different negotiation styles.
• Sales strategy realignment. A combined entity will re-evaluate which territories remain core priorities, shifting resources accordingly. Territories with robust licensing markets could see greater investment, while smaller markets might receive less direct attention unless served through sublicensing or local partners.
• Contractual renegotiation risk. As internal reorganizations occur, contract renewals may face delays. Buyers anticipating renewals should monitor contract end dates carefully and start negotiations well ahead of transitions.
• Short-term noise. During any integration, studios often maintain a “business as usual” line to prevent panic. The reality on the ground can include internal uncertainty, personnel departures, and temporary slowdowns as teams align reporting lines and priorities.

Real-world precedent: After Disney’s acquisition of Fox’s entertainment assets, buyers reported an initial period of flux where long-standing contacts were reassigned or departed. Certain channels that previously sourced content from the independent Fox distribution pipeline had to reestablish relationships with Disney’s distribution group, and some mid-tier titles saw delayed sales while the new corporate strategy firmed up.

What will still travel: content types buyers should prioritize

Buyers and studios both underscored the kinds of content that retain global appeal irrespective of corporate consolidation.

• Returning network series with annual cycles. These shows provide reliable viewership and advertiser confidence. Their annual returnability is a premium feature.
• Franchise material and tentpoles. Big-name IP travels easily and offers clear marketing angles in multiple territories.
• Limited-run prestige series that create event viewing moments. Streamers and buyers alike prize limited series that generate conversation and short-term subscription boosts.
• Local co-productions and originals. These hold unique domestic value and often come with better pricing leverage and promotional alignment.
• Unscripted formats with global adaptability. Game shows and reality formats that can be localized — for instance, Jeopardy! and Wheel of Fortune — remain valuable because they can be adapted economically across markets.

Buyers should weigh these categories against their platform type. Free-to-air channels may prioritize returning series and franchises to secure rating stability. Streamers, especially those seeking churn reduction, may prefer limited series and exclusive event programming.

Practical playbook for buyers and producers

The LA Screenings reaffirmed that the market is in flux but not closed. Buyers and producers who adopt flexible, rights-aware strategies can manage the uncertainty.

For buyers:

• Get contracts in writing. Secure clear language on territorial rights and digital windows. Contractual wording will matter more as studios consolidate.
• Prioritize co-productions. These provide first-run access, shared risk, and often better promotional integration.
• Balance your slate. Combine a few tentpole licenses with returning series and invest in local originals for differentiation.
• Start negotiations early. Anticipate integration-related delays and move early on renewals and pipeline commitments.
• Cultivate multiple supplier relationships. Dependence on a single major studio will be riskier post-merger.

For producers:

• Consider coproduction partners aggressively. International partners can secure financing and distribution guarantees.
• Emphasize global marketability. Projects that travel — strong central concepts, relatable stakes, franchise potential — will command attention.
• Negotiate digital clarity from the outset. Producers need to understand where projects will stream and whether windows will be retained by the studio.
• Pitch annual returnability if applicable. For series, commit to sustainable production schedules that support annual returns.

For sellers (studios and distributors):

• Maintain transparent communication. Buyers prize clarity on windows, rights, and pipeline health.
• Offer tiered rights packages. Flexibility can convert more deals, for example by offering linear-only, linear-plus-digital, or exclusive digital packages.
• Invest in buyer relationships. If the number of studios on the lot shrinks, close buyer relationships will become more valuable.

Scenarios to watch over the next buying seasons

Monitor these developments as indicators of deeper market shifts:

1. Territory retention moves. Watch for changes in countries where HBO Max or Paramount Global content currently sits with third parties. Early renewals or departures from existing contracts will signal strategy shifts.
2. Holdback strategies. If more studios adopt longer holdbacks for second windows on streaming, expect downstream buyers to demand higher fees or walk from deals.
3. Price spikes for marquee shows. Scarcity of premium content could lead to localized bidding wars, especially in high-stakes territories where a returning series or franchise is deemed essential.
4. Rise in co-productions. A steady increase in co-production announcements between international platforms and U.S. studios would confirm buyers’ pivot to risk-sharing models.
5. Distribution personnel churn. Track senior sales hires and departures; these movements often presage strategic changes in territory focus.

These scenarios will play out unevenly. Not every territory or buyer will feel the same pressure; regions with robust local production ecosystems can hedge better than those reliant on U.S. licensing.

The broader industry implications

Beyond immediate transactional dynamics, consolidation at the scale proposed reshapes the global television ecosystem.

• Market concentration reduces seller diversity. Fewer major suppliers increases the negotiating power of the biggest studios, but also concentrates risk: if a merged studio missteps, buyers have fewer alternatives.
• Creative risk-taking could suffer. With a heavier tilt toward franchises and tentpoles, mid-budget or experimental projects may struggle for greenlights unless supported via co-productions or boutique distributors.
• Increased geopolitical complexity. As studios control more global rights, regulatory scrutiny could rise in markets where local content quotas or competition rules matter.
• The screening week evolves. Historically a marketplace of content availability, LA Screenings may pivot to intelligence-gathering and strategy alignment as much as a venue for buying, with buyers using the week to assess corporate strategies and windowing plans rather than merely acquire shows.

A measured outlook

The Paramount–WBD proposition amplifies existing trends rather than inventing new ones: studios are protecting premium windows, buyers demand digital clarity, co-productions grow in strategic importance, and global ad weakness constrains budgets. The LA Screenings this year were less a turning point than a barometer: studios pitched stability and variety; buyers absorbed signals and adjusted tactics.

Structural consolidation will reverberate, but the industry has pathways to adapt. Long-term resilience hinges on diversified content originations, contractual foresight on territorial and digital rights, and stronger international creative partnerships. For buyers, the strategy is simple in principle though complex in execution — secure the content that delivers predictable value to your audience, diversify suppliers, and insist on rights that match how your viewers consume content.

FAQ

Q: Will the Paramount–Warner Bros. Discovery merger end LA Screenings as we know them? A: Not immediately. LA Screenings will continue to serve as a marketplace for discovery, relationship-building and deal-making. The merger could reduce the number of independent studio stalls over time, changing the scale and competitive dynamics of the event, but buyers will still need to gather on the lot to screen shows and negotiate windows.

Q: How will consolidation affect prices for content? A: Two divergent forces are at play. Scarcity of third-party inventory could drive up prices for remaining premium titles. Conversely, studios might withhold marquee content for proprietary platforms, which could depress prices for mid-tier shows. Outcomes will vary by territory and by the specific type of content.

Q: Will international buyers be shut out from premier shows? A: Studios emphasized a continued willingness to license globally, especially to preserve ad-supported revenue. However, some high-value content may be retained for studio apps or offered with stricter digital holdbacks. Buyers should negotiate robust contract language on territorial and digital rights.

Q: What should buyers prioritize when budgets are tight? A: Prioritize content with proven returnability and strong international track records, secure digital rights where possible, and invest in co-productions to guarantee first-run access and promotional alignment. Balance tentpoles with locally tailored originals to protect audience relevance.

Q: How will creators be affected? A: Creators may find their projects competing against a larger slate of tentpoles and franchise priorities. That increases the value of co-productions and boutique distributors that champion niche and mid-budget projects. Producers should seek partners that offer clear distribution paths and favorable rights splits.

Q: Are co-productions the solution to consolidation? A: Co-productions mitigate risk, provide local market advantages, and guarantee distribution alignment. They are not a panacea, but represent an increasingly essential tool for buyers and producers seeking stability amid consolidation.

Q: Will free-to-air broadcasters be sidelined? A: Free-to-air channels still matter, especially where linear ratings remain strong. Studios recognize their value and continue to pitch second-window deals and ad-supported packages. However, the negotiating leverage of free-to-air buyers depends on local ad markets and the availability of digital rights.

Q: What signs should buyers watch for that signal strategic shifts at studios? A: Monitor contract renewals in third-party territories, senior distribution hires or departures, official windowing policy announcements, and the balance of franchise versus mid-tier titles on studio slates. Early renewals or punitive holdbacks are clear indicators of strategic realignment.

Q: How long will the integration effects last? A: Integration-related uncertainty often lasts 12–24 months, depending on the size of the merger and how quickly leadership consolidates functions. Buyers should expect some short-term noise and plan negotiations well ahead of contract expiries.

Q: What immediate actions should buyers take after attending the screenings? A: Follow up on pre-existing negotiations that might be vulnerable to studio reorganization, lock in renewals where possible, and pursue co-production discussions for future seasons. Also update legal counsel on renewal timelines and ensure contract language protects digital and territorial rights.