Rich Greenfield, LightShed Partners co-founder, joins 'Squawk Box' to discuss the state of Paramount-Warner Bros. Discovery merger, antitrust concerns, what David Ellison and Paramount can do to move forward with the proposed merger, and more. For access to live and exclusive video from CNBC subscribe to CNBC PRO: https://cnb.cx/42d859g
» Subscribe to CNBC TV: https://cnb.cx/SubscribeCNBCtelevision
» Subscribe to CNBC: https://cnb.cx/SubscribeCNBC
» Watch CNBC on the go with CNBC+: https://www.cnbc.com/WatchCNBCPlus
Turn to CNBC TV for the latest stock market news and analysis. From market f...
What Rich Greenfield said
Written from the verified transcript and checked against it. Every figure links to the moment it was said.
Rich Greenfield said the Paramount-Warner Brothers deal hinges on structural remedies acceptable to state AGs, not on antitrust merits or politics. He noted the court set a March 2 trial date, with post-trial briefs in early April, and the deal's hard stop is June 4, when $7 billion goes to Warner Brothers if the deal fails. He argued the deal must be resolved before Christmas because if it reaches March, it's over. He outlined two major concessions: selling studio lots (Warner Brothers or Paramount) and major franchises like Harry Potter, DC Comics, and Dune, plus substantial catalog titles, to create another major studio; and divesting Turner networks including TBS, TNT, and CNN. He acknowledged the financial pain, noting cable networks sell at 3-4 times EBITDA versus buying at teens, but said it's the lesser of two evils versus $7 billion loss. He identified potential buyers like Hearst, Starz, and Comcast's leadership.
Key takeaways
Deal must get solved before Christmas; if it reaches March 2 trial, it's over.
Paramount likely must sell a studio lot and major franchises like Harry Potter, DC, Dune.
Turner networks TBS, TNT, CNN may need to be divested, despite cash flow needs.
Two choices: lose $7 billion outright or cure leverage via painful asset sales.
AGs' complaint focuses on movie studio power and linear cable leverage, not streaming.
Put me in, coach. I mean, I got to answer Joe's question. I mean, they all are 12 blue states. You know, I think the... we can waste a lot of time on air today debating whether they should be suing, whether the merits of the antitrust case are viable in court. Honestly, though, Joe, Andrew, it no longer matters because the court set a date of March 2nd. The trial won't end. They'll be post-trial briefs in early April. This is a judge who has never tried an antitrust case of this magnitude before. She's relatively new to the bench to begin with. She could take a couple of months to make a decision, and God forbid she comes out against, even before June 4th. The hard stop on this deal is June 4th. On June 4th, $7 billion goes to Warner Brothers, and this deal ends. And so I don't think the politics or the antitrust merits legally no longer matter. Only one thing matters right now: David Ellison needs to come up with a solution of a structural remedy or structural remedies that these AGs will accept, and there may be none.
But Rich, let's just discuss this. I'm of the view, you may disagree with my view, that this can't even get to March. This has to get solved between now and Christmas.
Okay, so if that's true, let's walk through the permutations as you see them about the options on the table to David and Larry Ellison about what they could or could not do from a structural perspective to persuade the AGs to settle this case and what that would cost.
So I think there's two major things they can do. We put a piece out this morning on this, and there's two major options they have, or two major things they probably have to do. One, they probably have to sell one of the studio lots. So either Warner Brothers or the Paramount lot, they're going to have to sell a significant amount of the major franchises. So think Harry Potter, DC Comics, like Dune. They're going to have to basically give up on some of the key franchises they were about to buy, and they're probably going to have to give up a substantial amount of the catalog titles sitting in one of the two studios. Because what, Andrew, what you basically have to do is you have to sort of tear off enough stuff so that you could create another major studio. If an A24, like whoever is out there, could buy these assets and then become a major, maybe a private equity firm, but somebody's going to need to be able to create another major studio. Paramount would still get the ability to combine HBO Max and Paramount Plus, would still get a lot more catalog content in total and have a far bigger company. But they would obviously lose a lot of the synergies and cost savings they planned to get. And on the cable network side, they probably have to get rid of the Turner networks like TBS, TNT, CNN. Like those, those are big cost savings and new savings they expected to get and leverage they expected to get to, quote unquote, bend the curve on cable networks. But I don't think they're going to be able to buy them all. Again, this doesn't matter what the legal implications are.
12 more exchanges in this transcript
Sign in free to read the rest of this interview. No card required.
Greenfield, R. (2026, August 6). David Ellison needs to come up with structural remedies the state AGs will accept: Rich Greenfield [Interview transcript]. CNBC Television. CEOInterviews.AI. https://ceointerviews.ai/interview/3019069/
MLA
Rich Greenfield. "David Ellison needs to come up with structural remedies the state AGs will accept: Rich Greenfield." CNBC Television, 6 Aug. 2026. Transcript, CEOInterviews.AI, https://ceointerviews.ai/interview/3019069/.
BibTeX
@misc{greenfield2026_3019069,
author = {Rich Greenfield},
title = {David Ellison needs to come up with structural remedies the state AGs will accept: Rich Greenfield},
howpublished = {Interview transcript, CNBC Television. CEOInterviews.AI},
year = {2026},
month = {aug},
url = {https://ceointerviews.ai/interview/3019069/},
note = {Speaker-attributed transcript with timestamps}
}
