Netflix’s Agreement with Warner: Insights from Official Documents and Behind-the-Scenes Actions

Netflix’s High-Stakes Acquisition Faces Legal and Political Hurdles

Netflix’s leadership has descended on Washington, but the real drama is unfolding in the courts. The Department of Justice (DOJ) has launched a civil investigative demand (CID) into Netflix’s proposed $83 billion purchase of Warner Bros. Discovery, signaling a rigorous antitrust examination that could drag on for months. Central to the DOJ’s inquiry is whether Netflix holds undue influence over content creators—a core aspect of its business. The timing is strategic: the DOJ issued the CID just two days before WBD shareholders are set to vote on the deal, with responses due by March 23, just after the March 20 vote.

From an investor’s perspective, these moves are classic distraction tactics. Netflix’s White House meetings and public posturing are meant to sway regulators and shape public perception, but the regulatory scrutiny introduces significant uncertainty and could delay Netflix’s plans. The CID is a formal escalation, and the DOJ has made it clear they’re investigating whether the merger could reduce competition. For shareholders, this marks a new level of risk. Netflix’s legal team maintains that its growth is driven by innovation, not monopoly tactics, but the government’s focus on its market power directly challenges that narrative. While the political maneuvering is visible, the legal process could be the real stumbling block for the acquisition.

What the DOJ Investigation Means for Netflix

The DOJ’s action is a direct challenge to Netflix’s strategic ambitions. This CID isn’t a routine review—it’s a signal that regulators are prepared to scrutinize Netflix’s influence in the streaming market. The language of the probe, questioning whether the deal could “substantially lessen competition or tend to create a monopoly,” echoes the Sherman Act, typically reserved for cases against dominant players like Google or Visa. Applying this to a streaming service with roughly 9% of TV viewership suggests a thorough and lengthy investigation is ahead.

For investors, the main concern is the timeline. The broad scope of the DOJ’s review means it could be many months before a decision is made on whether to challenge the deal in court. This creates a prolonged period of risk, turning Netflix’s $72 billion pursuit of Warner Bros. Discovery from a strategic move into a speculative gamble. The biggest threat is that the DOJ could block or delay the merger, forcing Netflix to pay more for an asset that may lose value during the process.

For sophisticated investors, this regulatory uncertainty is a major warning sign. It introduces a significant risk that could derail the acquisition and increase its cost. While Netflix’s legal team argues that the company’s success is rooted in innovation, not market dominance, the government’s focus on its bargaining power with creators is a direct challenge to Netflix’s growth story. The investigation could stretch for months, benefiting competitors like Paramount Skydance Corp. and making the outcome far from certain.

Insider Actions: What Netflix and Warner Bros. Leaders Are Doing

The true signals aren’t found in political theater or regulatory filings, but in executive actions and boardroom decisions. Netflix’s top executives, including CEO Ted Sarandos and co-CEO Greg Peters, have not been selling shares despite the mounting challenges. Their continued stake in the company suggests confidence, or at least a willingness to stay the course as they lobby in Washington and face DOJ scrutiny.

The situation at Warner Bros. Discovery is more contentious. The board has officially labeled Paramount’s offer as a “Company Superior Proposal,” directly challenging Netflix’s $83 billion bid. This forces Netflix to either match Paramount’s improved offer or step aside. This isn’t just a negotiation tactic—it’s a binding board decision that puts pressure on Netflix to act quickly, especially with the WBD shareholder vote looming on March 20.

Absolute Momentum Long-Only Strategy for NFLX

• Entry Criteria: Buy when the 252-day rate of change is positive and the price closes above the 200-day simple moving average (SMA).
• Exit Criteria: Sell when the price falls below the 200-day SMA, after holding for 20 trading days, or if a take-profit of +8% or stop-loss of −4% is triggered.
• Asset: NFLX
• Risk Controls: Take-profit at 8%, stop-loss at 4%, maximum holding period of 20 days.

In essence, this is a high-stakes battle for control of premium content, with Netflix wagering its future on a single, contested deal. The company’s significant cash outflows and high debt make this acquisition crucial. By holding onto their shares, insiders are doubling down on the outcome. Meanwhile, the board’s “Company Superior Proposal” designation underscores the uncertainty—Netflix must now prove its legal and political strategies can overcome boardroom resistance or risk overpaying for a diminished asset.

Institutional Investors: How the “Smart Money” Is Playing the Deal

The market’s reaction has been volatile, reflecting the uncertainty surrounding the deal. Netflix’s stock has swung sharply as the company navigates both regulatory and boardroom challenges. Despite the turbulence, institutional investors have continued to accumulate shares, indicating a belief in the long-term value of Warner Bros. Discovery, even as short-term risks remain high. The rationale is that adding premium content and scale is still strategically sound, even if the timeline is extended.

Notably, there hasn’t been a major wave of selling. Regulatory filings show that large investors are holding their positions, suggesting they view the current price as attractive relative to the potential value after the merger. They seem to believe that the DOJ’s probe, while serious, is a hurdle that can eventually be cleared, and that the board’s opposition is part of the negotiation process rather than a deal-breaker. The market is waiting for clarity, but the “smart money” is staying invested.

Key upcoming events will determine the deal’s fate. The WBD board meeting and any changes in their recommendation will be pivotal. More importantly, how the DOJ defines the relevant market will set the tone for the antitrust review. A narrow definition could ease approval, while a broader one that includes Netflix’s influence over creators could make the process more difficult. For now, institutional investors are betting on a resolution, not a collapse, and their steady buying reflects that view.

Final Verdict: Trap or Takeover?

Netflix finds itself in a precarious position—caught between a DOJ antitrust investigation that could drag on and a boardroom rejection demanding immediate action. While institutional investors continue to accumulate shares, this reflects a bet on eventual resolution rather than confidence in the current terms. The absence of insider selling, despite Netflix’s heavy debt, indicates that executives are still committed, wagering their own capital on a successful, if delayed, acquisition.

The DOJ’s aggressive stance is the main obstacle. By invoking both the Clayton and Sherman Acts, regulators are signaling a comprehensive examination of Netflix’s market power, particularly its influence over content creators. This is far from a routine review and is likely to extend the uncertainty, potentially benefiting Paramount Skydance, the rival bidder. Netflix’s legal team has pushed back, but the government’s focus on its competitive leverage is a direct threat to the company’s growth narrative and its $72 billion gamble.

The next critical moment is Netflix’s response to Paramount’s “best and final offer.” With just 24 hours to decide, Netflix must choose whether to match the offer or withdraw. The WBD board’s endorsement of Paramount’s proposal is a binding challenge that forces Netflix’s hand. This is the moment when institutional patience will be truly tested. While steady investment flows suggest belief in the deal’s eventual success, the lack of insider selling amid financial strain is less a bullish sign and more an indication of alignment between executives and shareholders in a high-risk scenario.

In summary, this takeover attempt is on shaky ground. The DOJ’s investigation weakens Netflix’s negotiating position, and the board’s stance means the deal is anything but certain. While major investors are holding steady, insiders aren’t increasing their stakes. Netflix’s upcoming response to Paramount will reveal whether the company is doubling down on a risky bet or finally securing the acquisition.