<\/p>\n
Let the legal battle begin.<\/p>\n
On Monday, a Las Vegas-based HBO Max subscriber sued Netflix over concerns that the streamer\u2019s plans to buy some of Warner Bros. Discovery\u2019s assets would create an anti-competitive environment in the entertainment industry and raise subscription prices.<\/p>\n
Netflix said last week it agreed to buy Warner Bros. Discovery\u2019s film and TV business, its Burbank lot, HBO and the HBO Max streaming service for $27.75 a share or $72 billion<\/a>. It also agreed to take on more than $10 billion of Warner Bros.\u2019 debt, creating a deal value of $82.7 billion. Michelle Fendelander alleges in her lawsuit that if Netflix\u2019s deal were to go through, it would decrease competition in the subscription streaming market. She is asking the court to issue an injunction to prevent the merger from happening or issue a remedy for the anti-competitive effects. <\/p>\n \u201cAmerican consumers\u2014including SVOD purchasers like Plaintiff, an HBO Max subscriber\u2014will bear the brunt of this decreased competition, paying increased prices and receiving degraded and diminished services for their money,\u201d according to Fendelander\u2019s lawsuit, which is seeking class action status. The lawsuit was filed in a U.S. District Court in San Jose. <\/p>\n Netflix on Tuesday called the lawsuit \u201cmeritless\u201d and \u201cmerely an attempt by the plaintiffs bar to leverage all the attention on the deal.\u201d<\/p>\n The Los Gatos, Calif.,-based streamer is long seen as the winner of the subscription streaming wars<\/a>, boosted by having successfully entered the streaming content space earlier than rivals and for its superior recommendation technology. By buying Warner Bros. Discovery\u2019s assets, it will give Netflix access to more franchises and characters, including Batman, \u201cGame of Thrones\u201d and Harry Potter. Netflix said it plans to keep Warner Bros.\u2019 commitments<\/a> to bringing its movies to theaters.<\/p>\n But Fendelander and some industry observers are concerned that Netflix owning one of its streaming rivals will hurt the entertainment industry because it means less competition.<\/p>\n \u201cThe elimination of this rivalry is likely to reduce overall content output, diminish the diversity and quality of available content, and narrow the spectrum of creative voices appearing on major streaming platforms,\u201d according to the lawsuit by Fenderlander, who has never been a Netflix subscriber. <\/p>\n Streamers over the years have steadily raised their prices<\/a> and some analysts said they would not be surprised if subscription prices continued to go up.<\/p>\n Netflix executives said they believe their deal to acquire WBD\u2019s assets will benefit key stakeholders.<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s going to mean more options for consumers,\u201d said Netflix Co-CEO Greg Peters on a call with investors last Friday. \u201cIt\u2019s going to be more opportunities for creators, more value for our shareholders. Together, we\u2019ve got the chance to bring great stories, cutting edge innovation and more choice to audiences everywhere.\u201d<\/p>\n Peters also pointed out at a UBS conference on Monday that Netflix combined with the assets it is acquiring from Warner Bros. Discovery would still amount to a smaller share of U.S. TV viewing <\/a>than YouTube. <\/p>\n