Major US Cinema Chains Rally Behind Ellison’s $111 Billion Paramount-Warner Bros. Merger
Developing story first seen 2 hours ago
David Ellison's proposed $111 billion (£87 billion) merger of Paramount Global and Warner Bros. Discovery has won public backing from America's two largest cinema chains, AMC Theatres and Regal Cinemas, with Regal's endorsement following AMC's by roughly a week. The support from major exhibitors is significant given the deal remains under legal challenge, with 12 US states, including California, having filed lawsuits seeking to block the combination.
Regal chief executive Eduardo Acuña has publicly voiced support for the transaction, aligning the chain with AMC's earlier stance. By demonstrating backing from key industry stakeholders directly affected by the merger, the exhibitors' endorsements could help counter regulatory concerns and bolster confidence in the deal's prospects as it navigates the ongoing state-level legal opposition.
- Regal Cinemas backs Ellison's $111bn Paramount-Warner Bros. merger
- Follows AMC's endorsement a week earlier
- Deal still faces lawsuits from 12 US states
New here? Start with this
Ellison here is David Ellison, chief executive of Skydance Media, whose company took control of Paramount Global earlier this year. He has since put forward a plan to merge Paramount with Warner Bros. Discovery, the owner of HBO, CNN and the Warner Bros. film studio, in a deal reported to be worth $111 billion. If completed, it would combine two of Hollywood's biggest studios and television networks into a single company.
AMC Theatres and Regal Cinemas are the two largest cinema chains in the United States, and both have publicly come out in favour of the merger. Their support matters because studios and cinemas depend on each other: studios supply the films, cinemas provide the screens, and a merger of this scale could change how films are distributed and scheduled in future.
The deal is not yet settled, as a group of 12 US states, including California, has filed lawsuits seeking to block it, generally on the grounds that combining two major studios could reduce competition. Backing from the biggest cinema operators is significant in that context, since it shows support from businesses directly affected by the merger, at a time when its outcome is being contested in court.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Supporters argue that the merger reflects the practical realities of a media industry reshaped by streaming, where scale is needed to compete with technology giants and to fund the theatrical releases exhibitors depend on. They point to AMC and Regal's endorsements as evidence that the businesses most exposed to any reduction in film output see the deal as a net positive, likely to strengthen investment in cinema-first content rather than diminish it. From this perspective, blocking the merger risks weakening struggling studios and, by extension, the theatres that rely on their films, at a time when consolidation may be necessary for survival rather than a threat to competition.
The case against
Critics, including the twelve states pursuing legal action, argue that combining two of the largest studios and content libraries in the world risks concentrating excessive control over film and television production, distribution and pricing in too few hands. They contend that reduced competition among major studios could ultimately narrow the range of films made, limit bargaining power for talent and independent producers, and leave consumers facing higher prices or less choice, even if some industry players benefit in the short term. On this view, regulatory scrutiny exists precisely to weigh long-term market health against the immediate commercial interests of those closest to the deal.
Coverage
- Variety — Ellison secures backing of both AMC and Regal for Warner Bros deal
- The Hollywood Reporter — Regal Cinemas CEO Is Now Team Ellison, Too