Ben Silverman: Time Warner Is Perfect Fit for Fox

Your next video will start in

Recommended Videos

  • Info

  • Comments


July 16 (Bloomberg) -- Ben Silverman, former co-chairman of NBC Entertainment, explains why Rupert Murdoch wants to buy Time Warner. He speaks with Pimm Fox on "Taking Stock." (Source: Bloomberg)

Why rupert murdoch wants to buy time warner now.

I think it is a perfect complement three asset to what he's got over xbox -- at fox.

The cable properties of time warner, hbo, the turner networks get short shrift.

They have a massive cable portfolio, but also the content side, the movie side, which i know everybody laments as a bad business, but clearly is still a big business, especially when you look at the franchise potential, and warner bros.

Owns dc.

21st century doesn't have marvel or dc or any sort of ip engine like they do at warner.

On the other side, time warner has no broadcast network tofox has fox.

Time warner has no sports click.

-- play.

There is amazing synergy.

They have so much scale in the production space.

Warner bros.

Television and now 21st century television at fox are massive producers to read they are the number one and number two producers of tv content for mainstream scripted programming.

Ben silverman, can you describe the difference in culture at 21st century fox and time warner?

I haven't had the privilege of working at either company, so i can't speak to it firsthand.

I will say both of them have an aggressive sales culture in terms of the distribution of their products and content.

They really know how to monetize their content quite effectively.

Whether it is a diversification play -- obviously, 21st century was a big early player with hulu but held onto their rights in a smart way.

On the other side, time warner really going toe to toe with netflix, continuing to invest in content and bring their cable numbers are higher with things like march madness and nba on the turner networks, there is a culture of aggression and salesmanship.

In both places as the former nbc entertainment co.

Chief executive, as well as the head of electus, what would a combination mean for content producers?

Would consolidation mean you have one fewer lawyer -- player to pitch stories to?

I think this is something, in a weird way, that is defensive on two levels.

A one it prevents somebody -- one, it prevents somebody else from buying them, but it also gives them wait in negotiations with bigger companies, companies like the potential comcast-time warner cable.

This company will look small in comparison.

They line up with more leverage against them and with more equal footing.

It's also in anticipation of potential companies like google and others coming into this market more aggressively and ensuring that they are still the drivers of content creation and still controlling the most scale of brands in the world.

If money were not a huge object for you, would you be interested in buying cnn or running it?

I personally would not.

I don't think it would be something that i would enjoy doing enough.

I would say that i think it's a great business.

As i travel around the world, it is something that so many people forget about.

It is global.

It really has a global footprint and a profound way.

It is one of its great advantages as it competes on a worldwide level.

This text has been automatically generated. It may not be 100% accurate.


BTV Channel Finder


ZIP is required for U.S. locations

Bloomberg Television in   change