Netflix Pitches Warner Bros. Deal as Job-Saver and Growth Bet as Hollywood Braces for a Streaming Mega-Merger

Netflix’s co-chief executives, Ted Sarandos and Greg Peters, have moved to calm internal anxiety and external skepticism over the company’s audacious plan to acquire Warner Bros. Discovery’s core streaming and studio assets, framing the proposed $72 billion deal as a rare consolidation that strengthens Hollywood rather than hollowing it out.

In a letter sent to employees on Monday — and filed publicly with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission — the executives argued that a combined Netflix–Warner Bros. would be “pro-consumer, pro-innovation, pro-worker, pro-creator, and pro-growth,” directly countering fears that the transaction could accelerate job losses and further erode traditional film and television models.

“We see this as a win for the entertainment industry, not the end of it,” Peters and Sarandos wrote, addressing a growing chorus within Hollywood that has warned the merger could mark a tipping point in the industry’s long shift toward streaming dominance.

The reassurance comes as Netflix faces not only cultural resistance but an intensifying corporate battle. Earlier this month, the streaming giant unveiled its plan to buy Warner Bros. Discovery’s streaming and studio businesses — a deal that would be Netflix’s largest acquisition ever and one that would fold franchises such as DC, Harry Potter, and HBO’s vast content library into its ecosystem. Days later, Paramount Skydance countered with a hostile bid for all of Warner Bros. Discovery, valuing the company at roughly $108 billion and escalating the stakes into a full-blown takeover fight.

In their letter, Peters and Sarandos said the rival bid was “entirely expected” but insisted Netflix’s proposal is the stronger option for shareholders, consumers, and workers. They emphasized that, unlike a Paramount-Warner Bros. tie-up, Netflix’s deal would not involve merging two traditional studios with overlapping operations — a key argument aimed at deflecting fears of mass redundancies.

That distinction matters in Hollywood, where “synergies” — the cost savings typically promised in mergers — often translate into layoffs. Paramount has estimated potential synergies of around $6 billion if its bid succeeds, compared with Netflix’s projection of $2 billion to $3 billion. Netflix has pitched that gap as evidence that its approach would preserve more jobs across production, marketing, and distribution.

Still, suspicion toward Netflix runs deep in parts of the industry. For years, the company’s streaming-first philosophy and limited theatrical release strategy have clashed with the preferences of major talent and cinema operators.

Sarandos has previously described long, exclusive theatrical windows as not “consumer-friendly,” arguing they are likely to continue shrinking. Aware of the sensitivity, the co-CEOs used the letter to make an explicit commitment: Warner Bros. films would continue to receive full theatrical releases.

“Theatrical is an important part of their business and legacy,” they wrote, adding that recent Warner Bros. hits such as Minecraft and Superman would still have debuted on the big screen under Netflix ownership.

They acknowledged that Netflix historically deprioritized theatrical distribution because “that wasn’t our business,” but said the acquisition would put the company squarely in that space.

Regulatory approval looms as the central obstacle. Both Netflix and Paramount have publicly argued that their respective deals pose minimal antitrust risk, but they rely on very different definitions of the market. Paramount’s David Ellison has said a Netflix–Warner Bros. combination would concentrate too much power in paid streaming, where Netflix already leads. Netflix, by contrast, is urging regulators to look at total television viewing time, including free platforms such as YouTube.

In the letter, Peters and Sarandos leaned heavily on that broader framing, citing Nielsen data showing that a combined Netflix–Warner Bros. would account for about 9% of U.S. viewing time, behind YouTube at 13% and a hypothetical Paramount–Warner Bros. combination at 14%.

“We believe the facts speak for themselves,” they wrote, signaling readiness for a prolonged regulatory fight.

Politics adds another layer of uncertainty. President Donald Trump, who has taken a keen interest in high-profile corporate deals, looms as a wild card. Paramount Skydance chief David Ellison and his father, Oracle billionaire Larry Ellison, are close to Trump, while Sarandos has longstanding ties to prominent Democrats. Trump has publicly praised both Netflix and Sarandos, yet has also said a Netflix–Warner Bros. combination “could be a problem” given its scale.

Behind the scenes, Netflix has been lobbying the administration by positioning itself as a stabilizing force in an industry battered by cord-cutting, strikes, and shrinking linear TV revenues. The company’s argument is that absorbing Warner Bros.’ assets would shore up one of Hollywood’s most storied studios rather than dismantle it.

For employees, the letter sought to shift focus away from deal drama and back to Netflix’s core growth ambitions heading into 2026. Peters and Sarandos stressed that a small, specialized internal team is handling the transaction, allowing the broader workforce to stay focused on organic expansion. They also pointed staff to internal and public communication channels designed to counter what they described as speculation and misinformation.

Whether the pitch resonates beyond Netflix’s walls remains uncertain. To critics, the deal still represents another step toward a streaming duopoly dominated by Netflix and a handful of tech-backed giants. To Netflix, it is a strategic bet that scale, libraries, and global distribution are now essential for survival — and that Hollywood’s future lies not in resisting that reality, but in reshaping itself around it.