Bret G.

574 posts

Bret G.

Bret G.

@BMGambling

Yourmomshouse Katılım Kasım 2022
139 Takip Edilen38 Takipçiler
BonkDaCarnivore
BonkDaCarnivore@BonkDaCarnivore·
It's not huffing. Again, I've got a hypocia, which is something I've talked about openly in the past with regards to the medication I have to take (and how pricey it is which sucks for people who can't afford it) and why I swim so many laps to eke out slightly better lung capacity. I sound heavy breathing even in spaces where I'm just sitting. And yeah, that makes it even more sad that you have all that space and it's still worth less than individual cars I have. Real high demand area there. But you knew that. Where do I live, Brian?
English
1
0
9
1.3K
Bret G.
Bret G.@BMGambling·
@BonkDaCarnivore I thought you were scamming with Quins discord? Is the $50 not helping you swim with cash?
English
1
0
3
148
BonkDaCarnivore
BonkDaCarnivore@BonkDaCarnivore·
Tonight is absolutely lit with people talking/complaining/whining/cheering their monetization payouts (or lack thereof). I feel left out. Should I start a sub service? I can call it Banana4stocks cause 4 is better than Banana3. But I'd have to charge like $15,000/month to keep up with Dom Lucre's repost fees. Eh. I think I'll just have another scotch.
English
1
0
30
1.4K
BonkDaCarnivore
BonkDaCarnivore@BonkDaCarnivore·
Catching a game in a devoted sports town like Chicago really highlights some of the sharp contrasts one faces as a Rams guy. On the one hand, the energy is insanely different - just through the roof. I'm not going to say the people were exactly welcoming or that I wasn't at all expecting the possibility of a group of them attacking me, but the banter was WAY more lively and passionate vs. a game at SoFI. Just a hugely superior in-game experience, especially if you're a Bears guy. Rams games just feel like a bunch of people decided to show up and have a mixer while a game goes on in the background. Nobody really feels like they care if they're there or not. On the other hand...I know we all talk about how we want to preserve and maintain these relic stadiums because of their historical significance, but once you're on the wrong side of 40, you become acutely aware of just how terrible the actual stadium experience is at a place like Soldier Field. From the bad seating configuration to the God-awful concessions to the lack of basic ass quality of life improvements you expect from a modern league, it ends up feeling like going to a game at Fenway - great idea on paper, trash in reality. So I get ownership wanting a new stadium. But the fact that they're going to a dome is so incredibly soft and lacking any character as they promote a corporate environment. They should have found a middle ground making a modern stadium that left the elements in play (which is one of the greatest home field advantages out there). Don't get me wrong, I froze my damn ass off and did an epsom bath when I got back to my hotel; the thermometer may have said 30, which I actually enjoy, but it felt like 3. But that's supposed to be part of the experience. Anyhow, TLDR: WHOOOOOOSE HOUSE?
English
3
2
24
1.8K
BonkDaCarnivore
BonkDaCarnivore@BonkDaCarnivore·
*Looks at markets today* Geez, I've really gotta go head over and rub the bull tomorrow. Good lord, what have you people done to it?
English
3
0
42
3.1K
BonkDaCarnivore
BonkDaCarnivore@BonkDaCarnivore·
Just FYI, there WILL be a TotD at some point in the next 9 business days (I know I've been VERY slow on this EOY, but if you look at the markets, that's been the right call). There's a very specific trigger I'm still waiting on for this ticker. Here's a hint:
GIF
English
5
0
23
5.2K
Bret G.
Bret G.@BMGambling·
BonkDaCarnivore@BonkDaCarnivore

Time for a lesson in economics! It's so rare I get to do these these days with how upside down everything is. $NFLX is paying $27.50 for $WBD. $PSKY was offering $30. Warner is taking Netflix's lower offer. People who don't understand economics are crying foul at this, stating Warner is taking the lesser offer to create a "woke monopoly" (whatever the hell that means anymore). But shareholder value isn't measured in purely the premium paid on an equity to acquire the assets. It's measured in future returns and the health of the company. First, let's look at the size of the 2 companies. Paramount Skydance ("Skydance") has a market cap of 14.75 billion dollars. Remember this number, it becomes important in a second. Netflix has a market cap of 425 billion, making $NFLX approximately 29 times bigger than Paramount. Netflix has an amazing balance sheet with only 14 billion in debt on the books in spite of its MUCH larger size relative to Skydance - which has about 15 billion in debt on its books. Remember that Skydance's market cap is only 14.75 billion, so they actually owe more in debt than the company is worth. So right out of the gate, Netflix is, by far, the healthier company. If WBD had accepted Skydance's bid of $30 per share, all cash, Skydance's debt would have ballooned to almost 90 billion dollars thanks in large part to its acquisition of Paramount (and a bribe to Trump, don't forget that) just a couple of months ago. The combined worth of Skydance and Warner would only be about 75 billion. Meaning it would be even more underwater. So if Warner's goal is to merge with an entity that can protect the Warner brand and the IP it holds rather than sell it off for parts to try and stay afloat, the Skydance offer needed to be dismissed out of hand. Then we look under the hood. Again, Skydance was offering $30 all cash (financed by a ton more debt). $NFLX's offer was a combination of cash ($23.50 a share) and about $4.15 in $NFLX equity, collared to a current depressed share price driven by the recent split of $NFLX shares. Netflix itself is an incredibly strong brand and almost always one of the best performers on the market. Meaning that it's entirely probable by the time this deal closes that the value of the $NFLX equity provided in this deal would make the sum total of the deal to Netflix well in excess of $30 per share like Skydance is offering (with no guarantee Skydance would even be able to raise the capital to complete the purchase) Which brings us to the most important parts: 1) We already saw this after Skydance acquired Paramount - the first thing they did was implement thousands of layoffs in an effort to trim 3 billion dollars of expenses off the books, because Skydance couldn't afford to keep Paramount fully operational. If Skydance were to buy Warner, you could expect an exacerbated repeat of that. Meaning Warner jobs would be heavily on the chopping block. And 2) Skydance at that point would be leveraged to the hilt as a result of these 2 studio acquisitions...so where, exactly, are they going to get the capital in order to fund theatrical ventures that these days can run a quarter of a billion dollars? You think Skydance is going to have the money to create a series of DC superhero movies (the most expensive of all because of all the CGI)? NOT A CHANCE! Skydance would have to drastically reduce its portfolio offerings and very likely sell some of the brand IP under the Warner logo just to make ends meet. In effect, a corporate raidership job where they sold the most valuable assets for parts and then pocketed the money as they saddled $PSKY with an ever growing debt load they'd never be able to repay. Absolutely ZERO shareholder value in the Skydance offer. Meanwhile, $NFLX doesn't actually have a lot of its own IP, but certainly has the capital necessary to make a splash in that space. Further, taking the Netflix offer over Skydance's maintains competition in the space. Since Skydance already has an enormous amount of studio IP, consolidation of that would be bad for the consumer. In Netflix's case, that competition is maintained because Netflix is essentially entering into a competitive space it didn't exist in previously. The number of competitors in the space remains at 3 - Paramount, Warner, and MGM (which Amazon recently acquired). The Skydance offer is actually the one that drives monopolistic practice, not prevents it. Back in my VC days, it was incredibly routine for the offer we'd put in for a series/seed round of a startup to not be the most lucrative on paper, but was almost always the best offer for the company in question - because there was more to the offer than simply the check that was being written; it was the support, infrastructure, expertise and guidance that we could offer over the higher dollar offer by a competing firm. Smart companies almost always took our lower bids over more cash upfront because they knew we were better equipped to guide them through the turbulent waters of growth and see to it that they achieved more value on the other end. I sometimes talk about a farm tech company that my firm was bidding against JD Vance's firm back in the day. JD's firm offered more money upfront, but had no support infrastructure. The company in question ended up taking the offer from Vance's firm over ours, and proceeded to waste away into oblivion because all they got was the cash - they couldn't succeed operationally. Meanwhile, we went out and found another startup in the same space, and successfully guided it to a healthy offering. To this day, it's in a much more robust and successful space. Thankfully for that company, the leaders of the org saw the value beyond just the size of the check. My history is littered with those stories. So, dear reader, the TL:DR if you made it this far: Netflix offers fewer job cuts, more growth of the Warner studio, less risk to investors, higher growth potential, stability, and maintains competition that is beneficial to consumers. Judging offers purely by number is a remedial viewpoint for those who don't understand structure of economy. Using organizational economic foundations, it's demonstrably true that $27.50 is more than $30. Congratulations to Netflix on the acquisition, and congratulations to the board, employees, and shareholders of Warner Discovery (of which I am one) on making the right choice.

QME
0
0
0
711
BuccoCapital Bloke
BuccoCapital Bloke@buccocapital·
The more I read about the Netflix deal, the more it seems like: 1. This is very bad for everyone that isn’t Netflix 2. It would be very good for Netflix 3. It should be blocked if our system still works Anyone think/read anything counter to this?
English
115
41
2.1K
160.1K
Bret G.
Bret G.@BMGambling·
@WeWatchedAMovie You should know that the first game and second game almost are never the same as well. Packers might still win, I would be surprised if they dominate like they did in week 1.
English
1
0
0
77
We Watched A Movie
We Watched A Movie@WeWatchedAMovie·
All I keep hearing about is how the Lions are a better team than the Packers. They played once this season already. Packers beat the living dogshit out of them. Its a divisional game so anything can happen but yeah, I don't get it. Packers ML all day.
John Ewing@johnewing

Since 2004, NFL teams getting +50% of bets on Thanksgiving have gone 36-20 ATS per @Bet_Labs ✅ Popular teams on Thanksgiving at @BetMGM 76% on Lions -3 vs. Packers 70% on Chiefs -3.5 at Cowboys 52% on Ravens -7.5 vs. Bengals Gambling problem? Call 1-800-GAMBLER

English
1
0
8
3.4K
Bret G.
Bret G.@BMGambling·
@operationdanish Ill add i do not care how bitcoin performs. I just think attacking someone for making a prediction and being wrong is petty. Im posting the above tweet since you were wrong and I dont recall seeing people make a point to come and laugh at you.
English
0
0
2
22
Dr Danish
Dr Danish@operationdanish·
Took a screenshot of this joker so I can make fun of him in 2026.
Dr Danish tweet media
English
7
2
32
2.3K
Bret G.
Bret G.@BMGambling·
@NHAunleashed @DeaceOnline Todd would rather attack random online accounts than Trump and Mamdani complimenting eachother and Deace convincing his audience of the 40D chess Trump is playing.
English
1
0
2
19
Bret G.
Bret G.@BMGambling·
@SteveDeaceShow Deace throating Trump is only rivaled by Trump throating Clinton. Thank you for continuing to prove why I stopped listening to you a while ago.
English
2
0
32
294
Steve Deace
Steve Deace@SteveDeaceShow·
This was a rope-a-dope master class by Trump. By welcoming Mamdani as he did — or what the Bible describes as “pouring hot coals” on your enemy’s head with kindness — he set the Islamunist up to be the face of Democrat failure in next year’s midterms should he follow through on his wretched and vile campaign rhetoric. I can just see Trump on the stump next year: “We gave him a chance, I was nice to him, my own side even criticized me for doing so. Then that Marxist SOB went out there and wrecked what was left of our greatest city. He is the Democrat Party, and we can’t let Democrats do that to America.”
Collin Rugg@CollinRugg

Top moments from President Trump and Zohran Mamdani’s time in the Oval Office today. 7. Trump defends Mamdani from people calling him a ‘jihadist,’ says he is a rational person. 6. Trump defends Mamdani after reporter asked him why he didn’t take a train. 5. Trump says he is fine with Mamdani calling him a despot because people have said way worse. 4. Trump says he would feel comfortable living in NYC with Mamdani as mayor. 3. Trump slaps Mamdani on the arm and says he can go ahead and call him a fascist. 2. Trump commends Mamdani for retaining a great police commissioner. 1. Trump says Mamdani has a chance to Make New York City Great Again.

English
256
132
813
161.1K
Bret G.
Bret G.@BMGambling·
@BonkDaCarnivore "I would blow Trump better than when he blew Bill Clinton"
English
0
0
3
94
Nerd Cookies
Nerd Cookies@nerd_cookies·
Brendan Fraser always has been and always will be incredibly handsome. 😍
Nerd Cookies tweet media
English
13
2
70
1.8K
Bret G.
Bret G.@BMGambling·
@BonkDaCarnivore First time homebuyers at 39 will be so excited to leave their kids with a mortgage!
English
0
0
1
28