Published December 26, 2025 06:55PM<\/p>\n
Sports media rights function as a critical link holding the entire global sports economic structure and system together \u2013 and recent developments in the pending sale of Warner Brothers \u2013 Discovery (WBD) could redefine how viewers access and watch sports in the future. The impending sale, whether to the original suitor Netflix or the unsolicited counter-bidder Paramount, revolves primarily around gaining control of the Warner Bros. movie business and HBO. But it could also help to determine the future of pro cycling TV coverage, since WBD currently holds the majority of the WorldTour content rights in many of the world\u2019s most important broadcast markets, and offers<\/a> approximately 300 races annually across all disciplines. While this issue is likely to be one of or perhaps the most under-recognized aspect of the on-going mega-deal and all the financial and political rumors swirling around it, it could be very important to cycling fans.<\/p>\n The constantly-changing saga of this bidding war has been extensively covered by the business, legal and political media ever since WBD\u2019s CEO, David Zaslav, announced that the company would evaluate \u201cstrategic options\u201d earlier this year. Netflix\u2019s $82.7 billion offer did not include WBD\u2019s cable channels or sports portfolio, which contains the Eurosport and TNT channels that carry pro cycling. Notably, the company had earlier suggested one potential plan which would have split the company into two parts \u2013 with these sports, cable, and specialty content assets to be called Discovery Global.<\/p>\n Netflix has historically been averse to live sports and the burdens of acquiring and maintaining sports licensing rights. By decoupling the cable and sports properties (including CNN, more on that below), WBD could potentially spin those assets off to existing shareholders or sell them to a different buyer, likely yielding a higher combined price than Paramount\u2019s current tender. That, in fact, is the angle that Netflix promoted, to support the attractiveness of their offer. However, many factions within the creative development and entertainment side of the industry denounced the potential merger, worried that it would concentrate too much power in a single company, and that it could constrain the development of new television and film projects in the future. Furthermore, a marriage of what are essentially the #1 and #3 streaming content providers could reduce theater distribution for movies, should Netflix try to shift consumers to an all-subscriber model. In short, the Netflix deal might kill Hollywood as we know it.<\/p>\n The \u201chostile\u201d Paramount counter-offer of $108 billion which emerged a few days later targeted all of WBD\u2019s holdings, including the sports licenses and cable channels, at a substantial premium above current market valuation. More significantly, if successful, the company intended to merge CBS Sports and TNT Sports to create a juggernaut of sports media license ownership and content across broadcast TV, cable, and streaming. In addition, Paramount promised the release of 30 movies in theaters each year, as a counterpoint to the Netflix offer. However, this promise came with concerns regarding the details of entertainment programming development, distribution, and consumer access freedom. Complications around the Paramount offer could snowball as anti-trust regulatory clearances are considered.<\/p>\n Legally, there are a multitude of hurdles both bids must clear, not the least of which are the FTC anti-trust review and FCC approvals; on paper, the Paramount bid appears least likely to succeed because of the monopolistic power shift it would hold over the entertainment, sports, and media broadcast industry. However, this is where the business and legal concerns begin to intersect with the political arena.<\/p>\n The Paramount bid led by David Ellison originally included funding from Donald Trump\u2019s son-in-law Jared Kushner, as well as money from Middle Eastern countries, including Saudi Arabia\u2019s Public Investment Fund and the Qatar Investment Authority, although Kushner\u2019s fund has reportedly since backed up. And it was reported that Ellison\u2019s father, Larry, the CEO of Oracle (and a couple weeks ago, at least briefly, the richest person on the planet) has guaranteed a significant portion of the bid with his own money; i.e., making the deal less contingent upon financing considerations. Although the situation is still unfolding, it would hardly be surprising if Paramount\u2019s offer were subtly (or otherwise) favored by President Trump, due to the participation of Kushner and his long friendship with the senior Ellison.<\/p>\n More recently, in mid-December, WBD signaled its preference to proceed ahead with the Netflix deal. However, the saga may just be beginning. As of December 26, rumors were emerging that rather than increase their offer, Paramount might be pulling out of the deal altogether and initiating a lawsuit against the directors of Warner Bros., charging that the company unfairly managed the bidding process. If true, this would throw the whole transaction into even greater doubt.<\/p>\n