Lead
Ted Sarandos, Netflix co-CEO, said on Friday he was surprised and disappointed that director James Cameron publicly sided with what Sarandos called a “Paramount disinformation campaign” over the contested Warner Bros. deal. The dispute centers on competing bids and public claims about theatrical release windows after Cameron wrote to Sen. Mike Lee on Feb. 10. Sarandos reiterated that Netflix has pledged a 45-day theatrical commitment for Warner Bros. titles and denied ever proposing a 17-day window. The comments came amid an active bidding fight in which Netflix has proposed an $83 billion acquisition of Warner Bros. while Paramount has circulated what has been called a $108 billion hostile bid.
Key Takeaways
- Sarandos publicly criticized James Cameron on Feb. 20 after Cameron’s Feb. 10 letter to Sen. Mike Lee backed Paramount’s approach to the Warner Bros. sale.
- Netflix says it offered an $83 billion all-cash proposal to acquire Warner Bros. assets more than two months earlier; Paramount has advanced competing offers reportedly framed at roughly $108 billion.
- Sarandos maintained Netflix has committed to a 45-day theatrical window for Warner Bros. films and denied ever proposing a 17-day window.
- Paramount, led by David Ellison and backed by Oracle founder Larry Ellison, has signaled potential increases to its unsolicited bid and highlighted regulatory timing claims after clearing a Hart-Scott-Rodino waiting period.
- Sen. Mike Lee has pressed follow-up questions to Netflix and Warner Bros. executives after an antitrust subcommittee appearance; a shareholder vote on the board-endorsed Netflix proposal is set for March 20.
- Netflix warned that Paramount’s projected cost-cutting plans, stated as $6 billion and later portrayed as $16 billion, could trigger substantial layoffs at Warner Bros. Discovery.
- Netflix has defended its financing plan as all-cash and balance-sheet-preserving in statements to investors on Feb. 17.
Background
The contest over Warner Bros. stems from multiple suitors seeking control of assets tied to film, television and HBO Max. Netflix announced a proposed deal to acquire Warner Bros. studios, television operations and streaming assets for $83 billion, framed as an all-cash transaction intended to preserve creative opportunities and consumer choice. Separately, David Ellison, whose Skydance acquired Paramount in August 2025, has pursued an aggressive approach to acquire more of the legacy studio ecosystem and has placed unsolicited offers on the table.
James Cameron, an outspoken advocate for theatrical exhibition, wrote to Sen. Mike Lee on Feb. 10 expressing concern that a Netflix purchase would be “disastrous for the theatrical motion picture business,” and implicitly supporting Paramount’s position. Industry debates over theatrical windows, streaming-first premieres and preservation of cinema audiences have intensified since studios began experimenting with shortened release windows in the wake of pandemic-era distribution shifts.
Main Event
On Fox Business’ The Claman Countdown this week, Sarandos said he had met with Cameron in late December and explained Netflix’s pledge to honor a 45-day theatrical window for Warner Bros. releases. He emphasized he had repeated that commitment publicly and under oath before the Senate Subcommittee on Antitrust. Sarandos expressed particular frustration that Cameron would quote or endorse a 17-day-window claim that Sarandos insists he never made.
The public spat unfolded as Paramount, led by David Ellison, advanced what Deadline and others characterized as a hostile pursuit of Warner Bros. Discovery. Paramount has asserted the Hart-Scott-Rodino waiting period tied to its unsolicited offer has expired and argued there is no statutory barrier to closing in the U.S., although shareholders and the WBD board remain key gatekeepers.
Sarandos also used interviews this week to attack the financial assumptions underpinning the Ellisons’ bid, arguing proposed cost savings—framed by the Ellisons as $6 billion and by their critics as much higher—would translate into deep personnel cuts across Warner Bros. Discovery. Netflix reiterated on Feb. 17 that its financing model relied on strong cash flow and an all-cash structure intended to preserve a healthy balance sheet.
Regulators and lawmakers have stepped into the fray: the California Attorney General said the state was “taking a close look” at any Netflix-Paramount-WBD merger implications, and Sen. Mike Lee has followed up with formal questions to Netflix and Warner Bros. executives about competition issues and production commitments.
Analysis & Implications
The clash between Sarandos and Cameron highlights how high-profile creators can influence merger narratives and regulatory framing. Cameron’s public appeal to a senator amplified concerns about theatrical stewardship; Sarandos’ rebuttal sought to neutralize that message by asserting a clear contractual and public commitment to an extended theatrical window. For regulators and shareholders, conflicting claims about distribution plans complicate assessments of consumer harm and competitive effects.
From a corporate-finance perspective, the competing price figures—Netflix’s $83 billion offer versus reported Paramount positioning around $108 billion—raise different questions about leverage, integration costs and potential synergies. Netflix’s all-cash pitch aims to reassure investors and regulators that the company will not saddle Warner Bros. with unsustainable debt, while Paramount’s higher headline valuations and promises of cost savings invite scrutiny about how those savings would be realized and at what human cost.
Politically, the dispute has pushed the issue into Washington, where the antitrust subcommittee chaired by Sen. Lee is actively probing the transaction. That increases the odds that regulatory review will weigh not only market concentration metrics but also public commitments from suitors about production spend, theatrical access and potential impacts on workers. Any misalignment between public promises and internal plans could become a focal point for opposition.
Comparison & Data
| Bid / Claim | Value / Detail |
|---|---|
| Netflix proposal | $83 billion, all-cash offer (publicized) |
| Paramount pursuit | Reported around $108 billion, unsolicited/hostile bids |
| Ellison cost-savings claim | Stated $6 billion; critics cite potential $16 billion impact |
| Netflix theatrical pledge | 45-day commitment to theatrical exhibition (per Sarandos) |
The numeric gulf between the offers and the variance in stated cost-savings underline the financial and operational uncertainty facing Warner Bros. Discovery employees and investors. Stakeholders will be watching which numbers hold up under due diligence and whether any buyer can demonstrate a credible plan that aligns cash-flow, workforce stability and regulatory compliance.
Reactions & Quotes
“I have never even uttered the words ’17-day window.'”
Ted Sarandos, Netflix co-CEO (on Fox Business)
Sarandos used that statement to rebut public attributions to him and to question why Cameron would amplify an assertion Sarandos says he never made.
“I look forward to receiving their responses next week. The subcommittee continues to examine this merger and the competition issues it raises.”
Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT), Subcommittee on Antitrust
Lee’s post signaled continued congressional scrutiny and a request for formal follow-up from the companies involved.
“Netflix’s strong cash flow generation supports our all-cash transaction structure while preserving a healthy balance sheet and flexibility to capitalize on future strategic priorities.”
Netflix corporate statement (Feb. 17)
Netflix’s investor-facing language was cited to show how the company frames the proposed transaction for regulators and shareholders.
Unconfirmed
- Whether James Cameron knowingly participated in a coordinated “disinformation” effort tied to Paramount beyond expressing his view; that characterization comes from Sarandos and is not independently proven.
- The precise structure and feasibility of the Ellisons’ claimed cost savings (whether $6 billion or $16 billion) and the specific workforce impacts remain unverified publicly.
- The exact submission date for Netflix’s responses to Sen. Lee’s questions was not confirmed by Lee’s office; Deadline reports the reply is expected near Feb. 23 but an official deadline was not provided.
Bottom Line
This episode underscores how merger fights now play out simultaneously in boardrooms, regulatory filings and public opinion. High-profile creatives can shape narratives and influence lawmakers, but corporate commitments—such as Netflix’s asserted 45-day window—will carry weight with regulators and investors if they are contractually enforceable and consistent across filings and testimony.
As the March 20 shareholder vote approaches and regulatory reviews continue, the decisive factors will likely be the credibility of financing plans, the enforceability of public commitments on theatrical and production spend, and the degree to which proposed cost savings threaten jobs or competition. Stakeholders should watch filings, sworn testimony and shareholder materials for concrete, verifiable details rather than rhetorical claims.
Sources
- Deadline (news) — original reporting on Sarandos remarks and the WBD sale process.
- Sen. Mike Lee (@SenMikeLee) (official/social) — public post following the antitrust subcommittee appearance (Feb. 20, 2026).
- U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust Division (official) — background on Hart-Scott-Rodino notification and review process.