azam.a personal page - To The Moon

azam.a

azam.a

No personal profile

2Follow

0Followers

0Topic

0Badge

02-13 07:20

Share your opinion about this news…

Bitcoin Is ‘No Longer Digital Gold,’ Deutsche Bank Strategist Says

2025-12-08

Share your opinion about this news…

As Netflix Swoops In to Buy Warner Bros., We Revisit the Studio’s Long, Twisted Journey

2025-07-24

Share your opinion about this news…

Sorry, the original content has been removed

Go to Tiger App to see more news

{"i18n":{"language":"en_US"},"userPageInfo":{"id":"4097734155216680","uuid":"4097734155216680","gmtCreate":1634631089453,"gmtModify":1636594866181,"name":"azam.a","pinyin":"azamaazama","introduction":"","introductionEn":"","signature":"","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6ad35c4d99135e1f172a209f9042b94d","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":0,"headSize":2,"tweetSize":0,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":4,"level":{"id":0,"name":"","nameTw":"","represent":"","factor":"","iconColor":"","bgColor":""},"themeCounts":0,"badgeCounts":0,"badges":[],"moderator":false,"superModerator":false,"manageSymbols":null,"badgeLevel":null,"boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"favoriteSize":0,"symbols":null,"coverImage":null,"realNameVerified":"success","userBadges":[{"badgeId":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493-3","templateUuid":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493","name":" Tiger Idol","description":"Join the tiger community for 1500 days","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8b40ae7da5bf081a1c84df14bf9e6367","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f160eceddd7c284a8e1136557615cfad","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/11792805c468334a9b31c39f95a41c6a","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2025.11.28","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001},{"badgeId":"44212b71d0be4ec88898348dbe882e03-3","templateUuid":"44212b71d0be4ec88898348dbe882e03","name":"President Tiger","description":"The transaction amount of the securities account reaches $1,000,000","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/fbeac6bb240db7da8b972e5183d050ba","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/436cdf80292b99f0a992e78750ac4e3a","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/506a259a7b456f037592c3b23c779599","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2023.07.14","exceedPercentage":"93.95%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1101},{"badgeId":"a83d7582f45846ffbccbce770ce65d84-1","templateUuid":"a83d7582f45846ffbccbce770ce65d84","name":"Real Trader","description":"Completed a transaction","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2e08a1cc2087a1de93402c2c290fa65b","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4504a6397ce1137932d56e5f4ce27166","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4b22c79415b4cd6e3d8ebc4a0fa32604","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.29","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100}],"userBadgeCount":3,"currentWearingBadge":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":null,"starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":0,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"baikeInfo":{},"tab":"post","tweets":[{"id":532139445834720,"gmtCreate":1770938420403,"gmtModify":1770946234365,"author":{"id":"4097734155216680","authorId":"4097734155216680","name":"azam.a","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6ad35c4d99135e1f172a209f9042b94d","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4097734155216680","authorIdStr":"4097734155216680"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Share your opinion about this news…","listText":"Share your opinion about this news…","text":"Share your opinion about this news…","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/532139445834720","repostId":"2611972298","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"2611972298","kind":"highlight","pubTimestamp":1770917422,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2611972298?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2026-02-13 01:30","market":"nz","language":"en","title":"Bitcoin Is ‘No Longer Digital Gold,’ Deutsche Bank Strategist Says","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2611972298","media":"Bitcoinist","summary":"A Deutsche Bank strategist argued that bitcoin has “decoupled” from gold and no longer fits the “digital gold” label, pointing...","content":"<div>\n<p>Trusted Editorial content, reviewed by leading industry experts and seasoned editors. Ad Disclosure\n\nA Deutsche Bank strategist argued that bitcoin has “decoupled” from gold and no longer fits the “...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://bitcoinist.com/bitcoin-no-longer-digital-gold-deutsche-bank/\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n","source":"bitcoinist_highlight","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Bitcoin Is ‘No Longer Digital Gold,’ Deutsche Bank Strategist Says</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nBitcoin Is ‘No Longer Digital Gold,’ Deutsche Bank Strategist Says\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2026-02-13 01:30 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://bitcoinist.com/bitcoin-no-longer-digital-gold-deutsche-bank/><strong>Bitcoinist</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Trusted Editorial content, reviewed by leading industry experts and seasoned editors. Ad Disclosure\n\nA Deutsche Bank strategist argued that bitcoin has “decoupled” from gold and no longer fits the “...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://bitcoinist.com/bitcoin-no-longer-digital-gold-deutsche-bank/\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://bitcoinist.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/ChatGPT-Image-Feb-12-2026-10_26_17-AM.png?resize=350%2C250","relate_stocks":{"BTC":"Grayscale Bitcoin Mini Trust","BITX":"2倍比特币期货ETF-Volatility Shares","BITO":"比特币期货ETF-ProShares"},"source_url":"https://bitcoinist.com/bitcoin-no-longer-digital-gold-deutsche-bank/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2611972298","content_text":"Trusted Editorial content, reviewed by leading industry experts and seasoned editors. Ad Disclosure\n\nA Deutsche Bank strategist argued that bitcoin has “decoupled” from gold and no longer fits the “digital gold” label, pointing to a sharp divergence in 2025 performance as regulation uncertainty and ETF outflows weigh on sentiment.\nIn a Yahoo Finance interview, Deutsche Bank senior strategist Marion Laboure told Executive Editor Brian Sozzi and senior reporter Ines Ferré that bitcoin’s volatility hasn’t disappeared, it’s simply showing up again, at an awkward moment for a market that spent much of last year selling a cleaner institutional adoption story.\n\n\n\n\n\n\nIs Bitcoin No Longer Digital Gold?\nLaboure framed recent weakness as another reminder that “volatility is a feature of Bitcoin. It’s not a bug,” while flagging what she described as “a lot of ETFs outflows” since October alongside a messy policy backdrop in Washington. She pointed to the Stablecoin “Genius Act” being signed last year, but said the Clarity Act “is still in Congress and provides an additional layer of uncertainty.”\nRelated Reading: Bithumb Blames System Flaws For $40 Billion Bitcoin Giveaway\nShe also cited a pullback in retail participation. “In our latest survey, we looked at the US crypto adoption,” Laboure said. “And in July, we had 17% of Americans who had invested in crypto. And the number was down to 12% in December.”\n\nBitcoin is “no longer digital gold,” Deutsche Bank strategist Marion Laboure says. “Gold outperformed by 65% in 2025. Bitcoin declined by 6.5%.” pic.twitter.com/eBCYp4cxMt\n— Yahoo Finance (@YahooFinance) February 11, 2026\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nPressed on whether bitcoin still deserves the “digital gold” tagline, Laboure leaned on returns. “If you think about that, if I look at the 2025 performance, it’s not digital gold or it’s no longer digital gold,” she said. “Gold outperformed by 65% in 2025. Bitcoin declined by 6.5%. So we are clearly seeing this divergence.”\nHer broader framing was that bitcoin remains stuck between narratives. “Bitcoin, I would say it’s not a means of payment. It’s not a currency. It’s unlikely to replace gold or fiat currencies,” Laboure continued. “And I think the way I see Bitcoin is we are in this transition, we are transitioning between a pure speculative asset to a more realistic use case.”\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nRelated Reading: Binance Founder CZ Reveals How Bitcoin Turned Him Into A Billionaire\nLaboure also returned to what she called a “Tinkerbell effect,” describing a dynamic where price rises on belief rather than fundamentals, until it doesn’t. “So basically, it’s when the price is based on wishful thinking, much more than fundamental factors,” she said.\nAsked what could reignite upside momentum, Laboure pointed back to the last two years’ catalysts and suggested the move still looks larger than those inputs alone explain. She noted bitcoin’s run from roughly $35,000 in November 2023 through a period she called “exceptional years,” citing ETF approvals, the halving, and a “very positive stance” from President Trump after his election.\n“But all these factors alone probably didn’t fully explain the move that we had from $35,000 in November 2023 to over $120,000 in October last year,” she said, arguing that the market is still searching for a more durable anchor than narrative-driven flows.\nX Pushes Back\nLaboure’s “digital gold” critique drew immediate rebuttals on X. Bloomberg ETF analyst Eric Balchunas called it “a fine argument to make” but added: “To hinge it on one year’s returns is absurd. Does that mean it WAS digital gold in 2023 and 2024 when it was up 450%? But now it isn’t because gold did better in 2025. Make it make sense.”\nOthers went more ad hominem. VP of Investor Relations at Nakamoto Steven Lubka dismissed the comments as coming from a “CBDC shill,” referencing an older citation where she said: “When it comes to retail CBDCs, the question is not whether it will happen, but when.”\nAt press time, BTC traded at $68,007.\nBitcoin hovers around the 200-week EMA, 1-week chart | Source: BTCUSDT on TradingView.com\nFeatured image created with DALL.E, chart from TradingView.com\n\n\n\nEditorial Process for bitcoinist is centered on delivering thoroughly researched, accurate, and unbiased content. We uphold strict sourcing standards, and each page undergoes diligent review by our team of top technology experts and seasoned editors. This process ensures the integrity, relevance, and value of our content for our readers.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"BTC":0.6,"BITX":0.6,"BITO":0.6}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":0,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":508512351220368,"gmtCreate":1765170335380,"gmtModify":1765172308957,"author":{"id":"4097734155216680","authorId":"4097734155216680","name":"azam.a","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6ad35c4d99135e1f172a209f9042b94d","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4097734155216680","authorIdStr":"4097734155216680"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Share your opinion about this news…","listText":"Share your opinion about this news…","text":"Share your opinion about this news…","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/508512351220368","repostId":"2589829494","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"2589829494","kind":"highlight","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Dow Jones publishes the world’s most trusted business news and financial information in a variety of media.","home_visible":0,"media_name":"Dow Jones","id":"106","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/150f88aa4d182df19190059f4a365e99"},"pubTimestamp":1765164600,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2589829494?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2025-12-08 11:30","market":"us","language":"en","title":"As Netflix Swoops In to Buy Warner Bros., We Revisit the Studio’s Long, Twisted Journey","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2589829494","media":"Dow Jones","summary":"Like all the old Hollywood studios, Warner Bros. has taken a twisted path into the present, filled with mergers and acquisitions.","content":"<html><head></head><body><p style=\"text-align: start;\">Like all the old Hollywood studios, Warner Bros. has taken a twisted path into the present, filled with mergers and acquisitions—the latest a proposed sale to Netflix for $82.7 billion, including assumed debt. Some have worked out well and some haven’t, but the good ones are all long in the rearview mirror.</p><p>The 1950s heralded the end of the studio system of Hollywood’s Golden Era. The studios began to see competition from television, and they lost their theater chains to antitrust action by the U.S. Department of Justice. In dire need of cash, Warner Bros. made one of the worst media deals of all time in 1956, selling off its entire pre-1948 film library just as TV stations were about to need those old movies and cartoons to fill their schedules.</p><p>Like many studios, Warner was adrift for years. As U.S. culture changed in the 1960s, Warner and the other studios had trouble keeping up, and that was the last straw.</p><p>In 1967 an aging Jack Warner still owned a controlling interest in the studio and sold it to a film distribution company named Seven Arts to form Warner Bros.-Seven Arts. But Seven Arts had bitten off more than it could chew. After a string of flops in 1968 and 1969, the company was sold to Steve Ross’s Kinney National, which owned mortuaries, parking lots, and other decidedly nonentertainment businesses. The studio was re-christened again, this time as Warner Communications.</p><p>Thus began the best years for Warner both financially and creatively since the 1930s. It had production and distribution for film, television and music as these were all burgeoning in the 1970s. In 1990 it added publishing with Time Inc. It also brought a cable television system that combined with Warner’s to create one of the largest systems in the U.S., just as cable TV was about to boom. The new company was called Time Warner.</p><p style=\"text-align: start;\">The 1996 addition of Turner Broadcasting brought cable channels, the pre-1986 MGM film library, a plethora of cartoons, and the return of the pre-1948 Warner library, bringing <em>Casablanca</em> and Bugs Bunny back home.</p><p style=\"text-align: start;\">Though there was reported friction between the button-down publishers at Time and the laid-back Hollywood scene, the 1990s were peak Warner. The film studio pumped out hits and was finding new distribution channels internationally and with home video. Stuffed with ad pages, it was a high point for magazine publishing. The TV studio produced many of the top shows on U.S. television, including <em>Seinfeld</em>, <em>Friends</em>, and <em>ER</em>, all of which are still raking in cash today. The WB broadcast network started up. Cable subscriptions were expanding. CNN set the standard for television news, and the Turner networks added sports. Warner/Elektra/Atlantic was the largest distributor of music in the industry’s best decade.</p><p>But like Warner’s first golden era, this one also ended with a new medium: the internet. Old-media companies were justifiably concerned that it would disrupt their businesses, and with hindsight we know they were right to be scared. Time Warner CEO Gerald Levin thought the answer was another merger, this time with the premier internet service at a time when dial-up connections were still king—America Online. Despite being the smaller company, AOL was valued more highly than Time Warner in the 2001 all-stock deal that formed AOL-Time Warner.</p><p>This was a disastrous hookup of old and new media. The promised “synergies” never materialized. The World Wide Web overtook AOL’s walled-garden model of the internet. Most important, the timing couldn’t have been worse, with the deal being announced two months before the dot-com crash. Eventually, $99 billion of the $165 billion merger was written down. AOL was just sold in October for a reported $1.4 billion.</p><p style=\"text-align: start;\">The merger strategy that had been so successful for 30 years fell flat on its face, and since then, Warner has faced another long period of struggle.</p><p style=\"text-align: start;\">In 2018, with many parts severed from Warner like AOL and Time Warner Cable, AT&amp;T bought the studio, renaming it WarnerMedia. But just three years later it saw the strategic error of larding on $44 billion in debt (including assumed debt) to buy Warner’s flagging properties. By 2022, AT&amp;T had merged it with Discovery’s cable channels and spun it off asWarner Bros. Discovery—a pastiche of old media—which it remains today.</p><p style=\"text-align: start;\">Every media merger is different, but among these episodes the Netflix-Warner hookup most closely resembles the Seven Arts deal. Like Netflix, Seven Arts began as distribution for a new medium, in this case TV. Seven Arts bought TV rights from studios and packaged them together to sell to TV stations. Like Netflix, Seven Arts started making its own content when the studios weren’t producing enough. And like Netflix, it turned to acquiring a distressed old media company to add more content and production.</p><p style=\"text-align: start;\">This doesn’t mean the Netflix-Warner deal is doomed, but it highlights the integration challenges to Netflix as it brings in a sprawling old-media company.</p></body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>As Netflix Swoops In to Buy Warner Bros., We Revisit the Studio’s Long, Twisted Journey</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nAs Netflix Swoops In to Buy Warner Bros., We Revisit the Studio’s Long, Twisted Journey\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<div class=\"head\" \">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/150f88aa4d182df19190059f4a365e99);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Dow Jones </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2025-12-08 11:30</p>\n</div>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<html><head></head><body><p style=\"text-align: start;\">Like all the old Hollywood studios, Warner Bros. has taken a twisted path into the present, filled with mergers and acquisitions—the latest a proposed sale to Netflix for $82.7 billion, including assumed debt. Some have worked out well and some haven’t, but the good ones are all long in the rearview mirror.</p><p>The 1950s heralded the end of the studio system of Hollywood’s Golden Era. The studios began to see competition from television, and they lost their theater chains to antitrust action by the U.S. Department of Justice. In dire need of cash, Warner Bros. made one of the worst media deals of all time in 1956, selling off its entire pre-1948 film library just as TV stations were about to need those old movies and cartoons to fill their schedules.</p><p>Like many studios, Warner was adrift for years. As U.S. culture changed in the 1960s, Warner and the other studios had trouble keeping up, and that was the last straw.</p><p>In 1967 an aging Jack Warner still owned a controlling interest in the studio and sold it to a film distribution company named Seven Arts to form Warner Bros.-Seven Arts. But Seven Arts had bitten off more than it could chew. After a string of flops in 1968 and 1969, the company was sold to Steve Ross’s Kinney National, which owned mortuaries, parking lots, and other decidedly nonentertainment businesses. The studio was re-christened again, this time as Warner Communications.</p><p>Thus began the best years for Warner both financially and creatively since the 1930s. It had production and distribution for film, television and music as these were all burgeoning in the 1970s. In 1990 it added publishing with Time Inc. It also brought a cable television system that combined with Warner’s to create one of the largest systems in the U.S., just as cable TV was about to boom. The new company was called Time Warner.</p><p style=\"text-align: start;\">The 1996 addition of Turner Broadcasting brought cable channels, the pre-1986 MGM film library, a plethora of cartoons, and the return of the pre-1948 Warner library, bringing <em>Casablanca</em> and Bugs Bunny back home.</p><p style=\"text-align: start;\">Though there was reported friction between the button-down publishers at Time and the laid-back Hollywood scene, the 1990s were peak Warner. The film studio pumped out hits and was finding new distribution channels internationally and with home video. Stuffed with ad pages, it was a high point for magazine publishing. The TV studio produced many of the top shows on U.S. television, including <em>Seinfeld</em>, <em>Friends</em>, and <em>ER</em>, all of which are still raking in cash today. The WB broadcast network started up. Cable subscriptions were expanding. CNN set the standard for television news, and the Turner networks added sports. Warner/Elektra/Atlantic was the largest distributor of music in the industry’s best decade.</p><p>But like Warner’s first golden era, this one also ended with a new medium: the internet. Old-media companies were justifiably concerned that it would disrupt their businesses, and with hindsight we know they were right to be scared. Time Warner CEO Gerald Levin thought the answer was another merger, this time with the premier internet service at a time when dial-up connections were still king—America Online. Despite being the smaller company, AOL was valued more highly than Time Warner in the 2001 all-stock deal that formed AOL-Time Warner.</p><p>This was a disastrous hookup of old and new media. The promised “synergies” never materialized. The World Wide Web overtook AOL’s walled-garden model of the internet. Most important, the timing couldn’t have been worse, with the deal being announced two months before the dot-com crash. Eventually, $99 billion of the $165 billion merger was written down. AOL was just sold in October for a reported $1.4 billion.</p><p style=\"text-align: start;\">The merger strategy that had been so successful for 30 years fell flat on its face, and since then, Warner has faced another long period of struggle.</p><p style=\"text-align: start;\">In 2018, with many parts severed from Warner like AOL and Time Warner Cable, AT&amp;T bought the studio, renaming it WarnerMedia. But just three years later it saw the strategic error of larding on $44 billion in debt (including assumed debt) to buy Warner’s flagging properties. By 2022, AT&amp;T had merged it with Discovery’s cable channels and spun it off asWarner Bros. Discovery—a pastiche of old media—which it remains today.</p><p style=\"text-align: start;\">Every media merger is different, but among these episodes the Netflix-Warner hookup most closely resembles the Seven Arts deal. Like Netflix, Seven Arts began as distribution for a new medium, in this case TV. Seven Arts bought TV rights from studios and packaged them together to sell to TV stations. Like Netflix, Seven Arts started making its own content when the studios weren’t producing enough. And like Netflix, it turned to acquiring a distressed old media company to add more content and production.</p><p style=\"text-align: start;\">This doesn’t mean the Netflix-Warner deal is doomed, but it highlights the integration challenges to Netflix as it brings in a sprawling old-media company.</p></body></html>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"LU0719512351.SGD":"JPMorgan Funds - US Technology A (acc) SGD","LU2237957902.USD":"NIKKO AM GLOBAL EQUITY \"F\" (USD) ACC","LU1232071149.USD":"AZ FUND 1 GLOBAL GROWTH SELECTOR \"AAZ\" (USDHDG) ACC","LU2237957811.SGD":"NIKKO AM GLOBAL EQUITY \"F\" (SGD) ACC","LU1988902786.USD":"FULLERTON LUX FUNDS GLOBAL ABSOLUTE ALPHA \"I\" (USD) ACC","NFLX":"奈飞","LU1674673691.USD":"HSBC GIF GLOBAL LOWER CARBON EQUITY \"AD\" (USD) INC","LU0210533765.USD":"JPM GLOBAL GROWTH \"A\" (USD) ACC","BK4524":"宅经济概念","LU1674673428.USD":"HSBC GIF GLOBAL LOWER CARBON EQUITY \"AC\" (USD) ACC","LU0786609619.USD":"高盛全球千禧一代股票组合Acc","LU1064131342.USD":"Fullerton Lux Funds - Global Absolute Alpha A Acc USD","LU2543165471.USD":"E FUND (HK) GLOBAL QUALITY GROWTH \"A\" (USD) ACC","SG9999004303.SGD":"Nikko AM Shenton Global Opportunities SGD","LU2362541513.USD":"WELLINGTON NEXT GENERATION GLOBAL EQUITY \"A\" (USD) ACC","BK4527":"明星科技股","LU0942090050.USD":"UBS (LUX) EQUITY SICAV - US TOTAL YIELD SUSTAINABLE \"P\" (USD)  INC","LU0097036916.USD":"贝莱德美国增长A2 USD","LU0256863811.USD":"ALLIANZ US EQUITY \"A\" INC","LU1621768115.EUR":"AZ EQUITY GLOBAL INFRASTRUCTURE \"B\" (EUR) INC","LU0130517989.USD":"HARRIS ASSOCIATES US VALUE EQUITY \"R\" INC","IE00B19Z8X17.USD":"FTGF CLEARBRIDGE US LARGE CAP GROWTH  \"AG\" (USD) ACC","LU0976567544.SGD":"FTIF - Templeton Global Income A Mdis SGD-H1","LU1267930730.SGD":"富兰克林美国机遇基金AS Acc SGD (CPF)","SGXZ23171101.USD":"NIKKO AM SHENTON GLOBAL OPPORTUNITIES (USD) ACC","LU2362541273.HKD":"WELLINGTON NEXT GENERATION GLOBAL EQUITY \"A\" (HKD) ACC","LU0109391861.USD":"富兰克林美国机遇基金A Acc","LU2357305700.SGD":"Allianz Global Artificial Intelligence ET H2-SGD","LU0210536198.USD":"JPM US GROWTH \"A\" ACC","LU1069344957.HKD":"AB SICAV I - AMERICAN GROWTH PORTFOLIO \"AD\" (HKD) INC","LU0477156953.USD":"HARRIS ASSOCIATES US VALUE EQUITY \"RE\" (USD) ACC","LU2896262040.SGD":"JPM US GROWTH FUND \"A\" (SGD) ACC","LU1989764664.SGD":"CPR Invest - Global Disruptive Opportunities A2 Acc SGD-H","LU0496365809.HKD":"TEMPLETON GLOBAL INCOME \"A\" (HKD) INC (Q)","LU2361045086.USD":"WELLINGTON US QUALITY GROWTH \"A\" (USD) ACC","LU0127658192.USD":"EASTSPRING INVESTMENTS GLOBAL TECHNOLOGY \"A\" (USD) ACC","LU0006306889.USD":"SCHRODER ISF US LARGE CAP \"A\" (USD) INC AV","LU2361044865.SGD":"WELLINGTON US QUALITY GROWTH \"A\" (SGDHDG) ACC","IE00BFXG1179.USD":"BNY MELLON U.S. EQUITY INCOME \"B\" (USD) INC","BK4581":"高盛持仓","BK4532":"文艺复兴科技持仓","LU1046421795.USD":"富达环球科技A-ACC","LU0648001328.SGD":"Natixis Harris Associates US Equity RA SGD","LU0868494617.USD":"UBS (LUX) EQUITY SICAV - US TOTAL YIELD SUSTAINABLE \"P\" (USD) ACC","LU2361044949.HKD":"WELLINGTON US QUALITY GROWTH \"A\" (HKD) ACC","LU1201861249.SGD":"Natixis Harris Associates US Equity PA SGD-H","LU0980610538.SGD":"Natixis Harris Associates US Equity RA SGD-H","BK4534":"瑞士信贷持仓","LU0882574139.USD":"富达环球消费行业基金A ACC","LU2362540622.SGD":"WELLINGTON NEXT GENERATION GLOBAL EQUITY \"A\" (SGDHDG) ACC","LU0149725797.USD":"汇丰美国股市经济规模基金","LU0079474960.USD":"联博美国增长基金A","LU0106261372.USD":"SCHRODER ISF US LARGE CAP \"A\" ACC","LU2384288077.EUR":"AZ EQUITY GLOBAL INFRASTRUCTURE \"A-INS\" (EUR) ACC","LU0417517546.SGD":"Allianz US Equity Cl AT Acc SGD","BK4515":"5G概念","WBD":"WARNER BROS DISCOVERY INC","LU1720051017.SGD":"Allianz Global Artificial Intelligence AT Acc H2-SGD","LU1778281490.HKD":"HSBC GIF GLOBAL LOWER CARBON EQUITY \"AD\" (HKD) INC","IE00BKPKM429.USD":"NEUBERGER BERMAN GLOBAL SUSTAINABLE EQUITY \"A\" (USD) ACC","LU0353189680.USD":"富国美国全盘成长基金Cl A Acc","LU0203202063.USD":"AB SICAV I - ALL MARKET INCOME PORTFOLIO \"A2X\" (USD) ACC","BK4548":"巴美列捷福持仓","LU0077335932.USD":"FIDELITY AMERICAN GROWTH \"A\" INC","LU1035775433.USD":"AB SICAV I - AMERICAN GROWTH PORTFOLIO \"AD\" (USD) INC","LU0203201768.USD":"AB SICAV I - ALL MARKET INCOME PORTFOLIO \"AX\" (USD) INC","LU0642271901.SGD":"Janus Henderson Horizon Global Technology Leaders A2 SGD-H","LU0082616367.USD":"摩根大通美国科技A（dist）","LU0320765059.SGD":"FTIF - Franklin US Opportunities A Acc SGD","IE00BZ1G4Q59.USD":"LEGG MASON CLEARBRIDGE US EQUITY SUSTAINABILITY LEADER \"A\"(USD) INC (A)","IE00BSNM7G36.USD":"NEUBERGER BERMAN SYSTEMATIC GLOBAL SUSTAINABLE VALUE \"A\" (USD) ACC","SGXZ51526630.SGD":"大华环球创新基金A Acc SGD","LU1621768206.USD":"AZ EQUITY GLOBAL INFRASTRUCTURE \"AAZ\" (USD) ACC","LU1316542783.SGD":"Janus Henderson Horizon Global Technology Leaders A2 SGD","BK4585":"ETF&股票定投概念","LU1127390331.HKD":"AB SICAV I - ALL MARKET INCOME PORTFOLIO \"A\" (HKD) ACC","LU2326559502.SGD":"Natixis Loomis Sayles US Growth Equity P/A SGD-H","LU2264538146.SGD":"Fullerton Lux Funds - Global Absolute Alpha A Acc SGD","LU2108987350.USD":"UBS (LUX) EQUITY SICAV GLOBAL OPPORTUNITY SUSTAINABLE (USD) \"P\" (USD) ACC","IE00BQXX3D17.EUR":"GUINNESS GLOBAL INNOVATORS \"C\" (EUR) ACC","LU2552382058.USD":"WELLINGTON US BRAND POWER \"A\" (USD) ACC","BK4587":"ChatGPT概念","SGXZ99366536.SGD":"United Global Innovation A Acc SGD-H","LU1429558221.USD":"Natixis Loomis Sayles US Growth Equity RA USD","LU1435385759.SGD":"Natixis Loomis Sayles US Growth Equity RA SGD-H","IE00BQXX3C00.GBP":"GUINNESS GLOBAL INNOVATORS \"C\" (GBP) ACC","LU2552382132.HKD":"WELLINGTON US BRAND POWER \"A\" (HKD) ACC","LU1548497426.USD":"安联环球人工智能AT Acc","IE00BQXX3F31.USD":"GUINNESS GLOBAL INNOVATORS \"C\" (USD) ACC","LU1621767810.EUR":"AZ EQUITY GLOBAL INFRASTRUCTURE \"A\" (EUR) INC","LU1720051108.HKD":"ALLIANZ GLOBAL ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE \"AT\" (HKD) ACC","LU1621767737.EUR":"AZ EQUITY GLOBAL INFRASTRUCTURE \"AAZ\" (EUR) ACC","LU0672654240.SGD":"FTIF - Franklin US Opportunities A Acc SGD-H1","LU2087625088.SGD":"ALLSPRING  US ALL CAP GROWTH \"A\" (SGDHDG) ACC","BK4550":"红杉资本持仓","BK4588":"碎股","BK4108":"电影和娱乐","LU0211326755.USD":"TEMPLETON GLOBAL INCOME \"A\" (USD) ACC","LU1571399168.USD":"ALLSPRING GLOBAL LONG/SHORT EQUITY \"IP\" (USD) ACC","LU1814569148.SGD":"WELLINGTON GLOBAL QUALITY GROWTH \"D\" (SGDHDG) ACC","BK4507":"流媒体概念","IE00BKVL7J92.USD":"Legg Mason ClearBridge - US Equity Sustainability Leaders A Acc USD","BK4598":"佩洛西持仓","BK4551":"寇图资本持仓","LU2552382215.SGD":"WELLINGTON US BRAND POWER \"A\" (SGDHDG) ACC","LU0211326839.USD":"TEMPLETON GLOBAL INCOME \"A\" (USD) INC","LU0234572021.USD":"高盛美国核心股票组合Acc","IE00B19Z9505.USD":"美盛-美国大盘成长股A Acc","BK4125":"广播","LU1366192091.USD":"ALLIANZ US EQUITY PLUS \"AM\" (USD) INC","LU0256863902.USD":"ALLIANZ US EQUITY \"AT\" (USD) ACC","IE00B19Z8W00.USD":"FTGF CLEARBRIDGE US LARGE CAP GROWTH \"A\" INC","BK4115":"综合电信业务","LU0130102774.USD":"Natixis Harris Associates US Equity RA USD","BK4566":"资本集团","LU0868494708.USD":"UBS (LUX) EQUITY SICAV - US TOTAL YIELD SUSTAINABLE \"P\" (USD) INC","LU0215105999.USD":"SCHRODER ISF GLOBAL EQUITY \"A\" ACC","LU0708995401.HKD":"FRANKLIN U.S. OPPORTUNITIES \"A\" (HKD) ACC","LU2860962120.EUR":"CPR INVEST - ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE \"A2\" (EUR) ACC A","LU0234570918.USD":"高盛全球核心股票组合Acc Close","LU0225283273.USD":"SCHRODER ISF GLOBAL EQUITY ALPHA \"A\" (USD) ACC","LU0353189763.USD":"ALLSPRING  US ALL CAP GROWTH FUND \"I\" (USD) ACC","LU1823568750.SGD":"Fidelity Global Technology A-ACC SGD","SGXZ81514606.USD":"大华环球创新基金A Acc USD","LU2461242641.AUD":"WELLINGTON US QUALITY GROWTH \"A\" (AUDHDG) ACC"},"source_url":"https://dowjonesnews.com/newdjn/logon.aspx?AL=N","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2589829494","content_text":"Like all the old Hollywood studios, Warner Bros. has taken a twisted path into the present, filled with mergers and acquisitions—the latest a proposed sale to Netflix for $82.7 billion, including assumed debt. Some have worked out well and some haven’t, but the good ones are all long in the rearview mirror.The 1950s heralded the end of the studio system of Hollywood’s Golden Era. The studios began to see competition from television, and they lost their theater chains to antitrust action by the U.S. Department of Justice. In dire need of cash, Warner Bros. made one of the worst media deals of all time in 1956, selling off its entire pre-1948 film library just as TV stations were about to need those old movies and cartoons to fill their schedules.Like many studios, Warner was adrift for years. As U.S. culture changed in the 1960s, Warner and the other studios had trouble keeping up, and that was the last straw.In 1967 an aging Jack Warner still owned a controlling interest in the studio and sold it to a film distribution company named Seven Arts to form Warner Bros.-Seven Arts. But Seven Arts had bitten off more than it could chew. After a string of flops in 1968 and 1969, the company was sold to Steve Ross’s Kinney National, which owned mortuaries, parking lots, and other decidedly nonentertainment businesses. The studio was re-christened again, this time as Warner Communications.Thus began the best years for Warner both financially and creatively since the 1930s. It had production and distribution for film, television and music as these were all burgeoning in the 1970s. In 1990 it added publishing with Time Inc. It also brought a cable television system that combined with Warner’s to create one of the largest systems in the U.S., just as cable TV was about to boom. The new company was called Time Warner.The 1996 addition of Turner Broadcasting brought cable channels, the pre-1986 MGM film library, a plethora of cartoons, and the return of the pre-1948 Warner library, bringing Casablanca and Bugs Bunny back home.Though there was reported friction between the button-down publishers at Time and the laid-back Hollywood scene, the 1990s were peak Warner. The film studio pumped out hits and was finding new distribution channels internationally and with home video. Stuffed with ad pages, it was a high point for magazine publishing. The TV studio produced many of the top shows on U.S. television, including Seinfeld, Friends, and ER, all of which are still raking in cash today. The WB broadcast network started up. Cable subscriptions were expanding. CNN set the standard for television news, and the Turner networks added sports. Warner/Elektra/Atlantic was the largest distributor of music in the industry’s best decade.But like Warner’s first golden era, this one also ended with a new medium: the internet. Old-media companies were justifiably concerned that it would disrupt their businesses, and with hindsight we know they were right to be scared. Time Warner CEO Gerald Levin thought the answer was another merger, this time with the premier internet service at a time when dial-up connections were still king—America Online. Despite being the smaller company, AOL was valued more highly than Time Warner in the 2001 all-stock deal that formed AOL-Time Warner.This was a disastrous hookup of old and new media. The promised “synergies” never materialized. The World Wide Web overtook AOL’s walled-garden model of the internet. Most important, the timing couldn’t have been worse, with the deal being announced two months before the dot-com crash. Eventually, $99 billion of the $165 billion merger was written down. AOL was just sold in October for a reported $1.4 billion.The merger strategy that had been so successful for 30 years fell flat on its face, and since then, Warner has faced another long period of struggle.In 2018, with many parts severed from Warner like AOL and Time Warner Cable, AT&T bought the studio, renaming it WarnerMedia. But just three years later it saw the strategic error of larding on $44 billion in debt (including assumed debt) to buy Warner’s flagging properties. By 2022, AT&T had merged it with Discovery’s cable channels and spun it off asWarner Bros. Discovery—a pastiche of old media—which it remains today.Every media merger is different, but among these episodes the Netflix-Warner hookup most closely resembles the Seven Arts deal. Like Netflix, Seven Arts began as distribution for a new medium, in this case TV. Seven Arts bought TV rights from studios and packaged them together to sell to TV stations. Like Netflix, Seven Arts started making its own content when the studios weren’t producing enough. And like Netflix, it turned to acquiring a distressed old media company to add more content and production.This doesn’t mean the Netflix-Warner deal is doomed, but it highlights the integration challenges to Netflix as it brings in a sprawling old-media company.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"NFLX":1.95,"WBD":1.96}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":214,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":460037719577024,"gmtCreate":1753332526968,"gmtModify":1753333794259,"author":{"id":"4097734155216680","authorId":"4097734155216680","name":"azam.a","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6ad35c4d99135e1f172a209f9042b94d","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4097734155216680","authorIdStr":"4097734155216680"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Share your opinion about this news…","listText":"Share your opinion about this news…","text":"Share your opinion about this news…","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/460037719577024","repostId":"1170541813","repostType":2,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":290,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":532139445834720,"gmtCreate":1770938420403,"gmtModify":1770946234365,"author":{"id":"4097734155216680","authorId":"4097734155216680","name":"azam.a","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6ad35c4d99135e1f172a209f9042b94d","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4097734155216680","authorIdStr":"4097734155216680"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Share your opinion about this news…","listText":"Share your opinion about this news…","text":"Share your opinion about this news…","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/532139445834720","repostId":"2611972298","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"2611972298","kind":"highlight","pubTimestamp":1770917422,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2611972298?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2026-02-13 01:30","market":"nz","language":"en","title":"Bitcoin Is ‘No Longer Digital Gold,’ Deutsche Bank Strategist Says","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2611972298","media":"Bitcoinist","summary":"A Deutsche Bank strategist argued that bitcoin has “decoupled” from gold and no longer fits the “digital gold” label, pointing...","content":"<div>\n<p>Trusted Editorial content, reviewed by leading industry experts and seasoned editors. Ad Disclosure\n\nA Deutsche Bank strategist argued that bitcoin has “decoupled” from gold and no longer fits the “...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://bitcoinist.com/bitcoin-no-longer-digital-gold-deutsche-bank/\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n","source":"bitcoinist_highlight","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Bitcoin Is ‘No Longer Digital Gold,’ Deutsche Bank Strategist Says</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nBitcoin Is ‘No Longer Digital Gold,’ Deutsche Bank Strategist Says\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2026-02-13 01:30 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://bitcoinist.com/bitcoin-no-longer-digital-gold-deutsche-bank/><strong>Bitcoinist</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Trusted Editorial content, reviewed by leading industry experts and seasoned editors. Ad Disclosure\n\nA Deutsche Bank strategist argued that bitcoin has “decoupled” from gold and no longer fits the “...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://bitcoinist.com/bitcoin-no-longer-digital-gold-deutsche-bank/\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://bitcoinist.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/ChatGPT-Image-Feb-12-2026-10_26_17-AM.png?resize=350%2C250","relate_stocks":{"BTC":"Grayscale Bitcoin Mini Trust","BITX":"2倍比特币期货ETF-Volatility Shares","BITO":"比特币期货ETF-ProShares"},"source_url":"https://bitcoinist.com/bitcoin-no-longer-digital-gold-deutsche-bank/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2611972298","content_text":"Trusted Editorial content, reviewed by leading industry experts and seasoned editors. Ad Disclosure\n\nA Deutsche Bank strategist argued that bitcoin has “decoupled” from gold and no longer fits the “digital gold” label, pointing to a sharp divergence in 2025 performance as regulation uncertainty and ETF outflows weigh on sentiment.\nIn a Yahoo Finance interview, Deutsche Bank senior strategist Marion Laboure told Executive Editor Brian Sozzi and senior reporter Ines Ferré that bitcoin’s volatility hasn’t disappeared, it’s simply showing up again, at an awkward moment for a market that spent much of last year selling a cleaner institutional adoption story.\n\n\n\n\n\n\nIs Bitcoin No Longer Digital Gold?\nLaboure framed recent weakness as another reminder that “volatility is a feature of Bitcoin. It’s not a bug,” while flagging what she described as “a lot of ETFs outflows” since October alongside a messy policy backdrop in Washington. She pointed to the Stablecoin “Genius Act” being signed last year, but said the Clarity Act “is still in Congress and provides an additional layer of uncertainty.”\nRelated Reading: Bithumb Blames System Flaws For $40 Billion Bitcoin Giveaway\nShe also cited a pullback in retail participation. “In our latest survey, we looked at the US crypto adoption,” Laboure said. “And in July, we had 17% of Americans who had invested in crypto. And the number was down to 12% in December.”\n\nBitcoin is “no longer digital gold,” Deutsche Bank strategist Marion Laboure says. “Gold outperformed by 65% in 2025. Bitcoin declined by 6.5%.” pic.twitter.com/eBCYp4cxMt\n— Yahoo Finance (@YahooFinance) February 11, 2026\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nPressed on whether bitcoin still deserves the “digital gold” tagline, Laboure leaned on returns. “If you think about that, if I look at the 2025 performance, it’s not digital gold or it’s no longer digital gold,” she said. “Gold outperformed by 65% in 2025. Bitcoin declined by 6.5%. So we are clearly seeing this divergence.”\nHer broader framing was that bitcoin remains stuck between narratives. “Bitcoin, I would say it’s not a means of payment. It’s not a currency. It’s unlikely to replace gold or fiat currencies,” Laboure continued. “And I think the way I see Bitcoin is we are in this transition, we are transitioning between a pure speculative asset to a more realistic use case.”\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nRelated Reading: Binance Founder CZ Reveals How Bitcoin Turned Him Into A Billionaire\nLaboure also returned to what she called a “Tinkerbell effect,” describing a dynamic where price rises on belief rather than fundamentals, until it doesn’t. “So basically, it’s when the price is based on wishful thinking, much more than fundamental factors,” she said.\nAsked what could reignite upside momentum, Laboure pointed back to the last two years’ catalysts and suggested the move still looks larger than those inputs alone explain. She noted bitcoin’s run from roughly $35,000 in November 2023 through a period she called “exceptional years,” citing ETF approvals, the halving, and a “very positive stance” from President Trump after his election.\n“But all these factors alone probably didn’t fully explain the move that we had from $35,000 in November 2023 to over $120,000 in October last year,” she said, arguing that the market is still searching for a more durable anchor than narrative-driven flows.\nX Pushes Back\nLaboure’s “digital gold” critique drew immediate rebuttals on X. Bloomberg ETF analyst Eric Balchunas called it “a fine argument to make” but added: “To hinge it on one year’s returns is absurd. Does that mean it WAS digital gold in 2023 and 2024 when it was up 450%? But now it isn’t because gold did better in 2025. Make it make sense.”\nOthers went more ad hominem. VP of Investor Relations at Nakamoto Steven Lubka dismissed the comments as coming from a “CBDC shill,” referencing an older citation where she said: “When it comes to retail CBDCs, the question is not whether it will happen, but when.”\nAt press time, BTC traded at $68,007.\nBitcoin hovers around the 200-week EMA, 1-week chart | Source: BTCUSDT on TradingView.com\nFeatured image created with DALL.E, chart from TradingView.com\n\n\n\nEditorial Process for bitcoinist is centered on delivering thoroughly researched, accurate, and unbiased content. We uphold strict sourcing standards, and each page undergoes diligent review by our team of top technology experts and seasoned editors. This process ensures the integrity, relevance, and value of our content for our readers.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"BTC":0.6,"BITX":0.6,"BITO":0.6}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":0,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":508512351220368,"gmtCreate":1765170335380,"gmtModify":1765172308957,"author":{"id":"4097734155216680","authorId":"4097734155216680","name":"azam.a","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6ad35c4d99135e1f172a209f9042b94d","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4097734155216680","authorIdStr":"4097734155216680"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Share your opinion about this news…","listText":"Share your opinion about this news…","text":"Share your opinion about this news…","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/508512351220368","repostId":"2589829494","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"2589829494","kind":"highlight","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Dow Jones publishes the world’s most trusted business news and financial information in a variety of media.","home_visible":0,"media_name":"Dow Jones","id":"106","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/150f88aa4d182df19190059f4a365e99"},"pubTimestamp":1765164600,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2589829494?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2025-12-08 11:30","market":"us","language":"en","title":"As Netflix Swoops In to Buy Warner Bros., We Revisit the Studio’s Long, Twisted Journey","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2589829494","media":"Dow Jones","summary":"Like all the old Hollywood studios, Warner Bros. has taken a twisted path into the present, filled with mergers and acquisitions.","content":"<html><head></head><body><p style=\"text-align: start;\">Like all the old Hollywood studios, Warner Bros. has taken a twisted path into the present, filled with mergers and acquisitions—the latest a proposed sale to Netflix for $82.7 billion, including assumed debt. Some have worked out well and some haven’t, but the good ones are all long in the rearview mirror.</p><p>The 1950s heralded the end of the studio system of Hollywood’s Golden Era. The studios began to see competition from television, and they lost their theater chains to antitrust action by the U.S. Department of Justice. In dire need of cash, Warner Bros. made one of the worst media deals of all time in 1956, selling off its entire pre-1948 film library just as TV stations were about to need those old movies and cartoons to fill their schedules.</p><p>Like many studios, Warner was adrift for years. As U.S. culture changed in the 1960s, Warner and the other studios had trouble keeping up, and that was the last straw.</p><p>In 1967 an aging Jack Warner still owned a controlling interest in the studio and sold it to a film distribution company named Seven Arts to form Warner Bros.-Seven Arts. But Seven Arts had bitten off more than it could chew. After a string of flops in 1968 and 1969, the company was sold to Steve Ross’s Kinney National, which owned mortuaries, parking lots, and other decidedly nonentertainment businesses. The studio was re-christened again, this time as Warner Communications.</p><p>Thus began the best years for Warner both financially and creatively since the 1930s. It had production and distribution for film, television and music as these were all burgeoning in the 1970s. In 1990 it added publishing with Time Inc. It also brought a cable television system that combined with Warner’s to create one of the largest systems in the U.S., just as cable TV was about to boom. The new company was called Time Warner.</p><p style=\"text-align: start;\">The 1996 addition of Turner Broadcasting brought cable channels, the pre-1986 MGM film library, a plethora of cartoons, and the return of the pre-1948 Warner library, bringing <em>Casablanca</em> and Bugs Bunny back home.</p><p style=\"text-align: start;\">Though there was reported friction between the button-down publishers at Time and the laid-back Hollywood scene, the 1990s were peak Warner. The film studio pumped out hits and was finding new distribution channels internationally and with home video. Stuffed with ad pages, it was a high point for magazine publishing. The TV studio produced many of the top shows on U.S. television, including <em>Seinfeld</em>, <em>Friends</em>, and <em>ER</em>, all of which are still raking in cash today. The WB broadcast network started up. Cable subscriptions were expanding. CNN set the standard for television news, and the Turner networks added sports. Warner/Elektra/Atlantic was the largest distributor of music in the industry’s best decade.</p><p>But like Warner’s first golden era, this one also ended with a new medium: the internet. Old-media companies were justifiably concerned that it would disrupt their businesses, and with hindsight we know they were right to be scared. Time Warner CEO Gerald Levin thought the answer was another merger, this time with the premier internet service at a time when dial-up connections were still king—America Online. Despite being the smaller company, AOL was valued more highly than Time Warner in the 2001 all-stock deal that formed AOL-Time Warner.</p><p>This was a disastrous hookup of old and new media. The promised “synergies” never materialized. The World Wide Web overtook AOL’s walled-garden model of the internet. Most important, the timing couldn’t have been worse, with the deal being announced two months before the dot-com crash. Eventually, $99 billion of the $165 billion merger was written down. AOL was just sold in October for a reported $1.4 billion.</p><p style=\"text-align: start;\">The merger strategy that had been so successful for 30 years fell flat on its face, and since then, Warner has faced another long period of struggle.</p><p style=\"text-align: start;\">In 2018, with many parts severed from Warner like AOL and Time Warner Cable, AT&amp;T bought the studio, renaming it WarnerMedia. But just three years later it saw the strategic error of larding on $44 billion in debt (including assumed debt) to buy Warner’s flagging properties. By 2022, AT&amp;T had merged it with Discovery’s cable channels and spun it off asWarner Bros. Discovery—a pastiche of old media—which it remains today.</p><p style=\"text-align: start;\">Every media merger is different, but among these episodes the Netflix-Warner hookup most closely resembles the Seven Arts deal. Like Netflix, Seven Arts began as distribution for a new medium, in this case TV. Seven Arts bought TV rights from studios and packaged them together to sell to TV stations. Like Netflix, Seven Arts started making its own content when the studios weren’t producing enough. And like Netflix, it turned to acquiring a distressed old media company to add more content and production.</p><p style=\"text-align: start;\">This doesn’t mean the Netflix-Warner deal is doomed, but it highlights the integration challenges to Netflix as it brings in a sprawling old-media company.</p></body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>As Netflix Swoops In to Buy Warner Bros., We Revisit the Studio’s Long, Twisted Journey</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nAs Netflix Swoops In to Buy Warner Bros., We Revisit the Studio’s Long, Twisted Journey\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<div class=\"head\" \">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/150f88aa4d182df19190059f4a365e99);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Dow Jones </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2025-12-08 11:30</p>\n</div>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<html><head></head><body><p style=\"text-align: start;\">Like all the old Hollywood studios, Warner Bros. has taken a twisted path into the present, filled with mergers and acquisitions—the latest a proposed sale to Netflix for $82.7 billion, including assumed debt. Some have worked out well and some haven’t, but the good ones are all long in the rearview mirror.</p><p>The 1950s heralded the end of the studio system of Hollywood’s Golden Era. The studios began to see competition from television, and they lost their theater chains to antitrust action by the U.S. Department of Justice. In dire need of cash, Warner Bros. made one of the worst media deals of all time in 1956, selling off its entire pre-1948 film library just as TV stations were about to need those old movies and cartoons to fill their schedules.</p><p>Like many studios, Warner was adrift for years. As U.S. culture changed in the 1960s, Warner and the other studios had trouble keeping up, and that was the last straw.</p><p>In 1967 an aging Jack Warner still owned a controlling interest in the studio and sold it to a film distribution company named Seven Arts to form Warner Bros.-Seven Arts. But Seven Arts had bitten off more than it could chew. After a string of flops in 1968 and 1969, the company was sold to Steve Ross’s Kinney National, which owned mortuaries, parking lots, and other decidedly nonentertainment businesses. The studio was re-christened again, this time as Warner Communications.</p><p>Thus began the best years for Warner both financially and creatively since the 1930s. It had production and distribution for film, television and music as these were all burgeoning in the 1970s. In 1990 it added publishing with Time Inc. It also brought a cable television system that combined with Warner’s to create one of the largest systems in the U.S., just as cable TV was about to boom. The new company was called Time Warner.</p><p style=\"text-align: start;\">The 1996 addition of Turner Broadcasting brought cable channels, the pre-1986 MGM film library, a plethora of cartoons, and the return of the pre-1948 Warner library, bringing <em>Casablanca</em> and Bugs Bunny back home.</p><p style=\"text-align: start;\">Though there was reported friction between the button-down publishers at Time and the laid-back Hollywood scene, the 1990s were peak Warner. The film studio pumped out hits and was finding new distribution channels internationally and with home video. Stuffed with ad pages, it was a high point for magazine publishing. The TV studio produced many of the top shows on U.S. television, including <em>Seinfeld</em>, <em>Friends</em>, and <em>ER</em>, all of which are still raking in cash today. The WB broadcast network started up. Cable subscriptions were expanding. CNN set the standard for television news, and the Turner networks added sports. Warner/Elektra/Atlantic was the largest distributor of music in the industry’s best decade.</p><p>But like Warner’s first golden era, this one also ended with a new medium: the internet. Old-media companies were justifiably concerned that it would disrupt their businesses, and with hindsight we know they were right to be scared. Time Warner CEO Gerald Levin thought the answer was another merger, this time with the premier internet service at a time when dial-up connections were still king—America Online. Despite being the smaller company, AOL was valued more highly than Time Warner in the 2001 all-stock deal that formed AOL-Time Warner.</p><p>This was a disastrous hookup of old and new media. The promised “synergies” never materialized. The World Wide Web overtook AOL’s walled-garden model of the internet. Most important, the timing couldn’t have been worse, with the deal being announced two months before the dot-com crash. Eventually, $99 billion of the $165 billion merger was written down. AOL was just sold in October for a reported $1.4 billion.</p><p style=\"text-align: start;\">The merger strategy that had been so successful for 30 years fell flat on its face, and since then, Warner has faced another long period of struggle.</p><p style=\"text-align: start;\">In 2018, with many parts severed from Warner like AOL and Time Warner Cable, AT&amp;T bought the studio, renaming it WarnerMedia. But just three years later it saw the strategic error of larding on $44 billion in debt (including assumed debt) to buy Warner’s flagging properties. By 2022, AT&amp;T had merged it with Discovery’s cable channels and spun it off asWarner Bros. Discovery—a pastiche of old media—which it remains today.</p><p style=\"text-align: start;\">Every media merger is different, but among these episodes the Netflix-Warner hookup most closely resembles the Seven Arts deal. Like Netflix, Seven Arts began as distribution for a new medium, in this case TV. Seven Arts bought TV rights from studios and packaged them together to sell to TV stations. Like Netflix, Seven Arts started making its own content when the studios weren’t producing enough. And like Netflix, it turned to acquiring a distressed old media company to add more content and production.</p><p style=\"text-align: start;\">This doesn’t mean the Netflix-Warner deal is doomed, but it highlights the integration challenges to Netflix as it brings in a sprawling old-media company.</p></body></html>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"LU0719512351.SGD":"JPMorgan Funds - US Technology A (acc) SGD","LU2237957902.USD":"NIKKO AM GLOBAL EQUITY \"F\" (USD) ACC","LU1232071149.USD":"AZ FUND 1 GLOBAL GROWTH SELECTOR \"AAZ\" (USDHDG) ACC","LU2237957811.SGD":"NIKKO AM GLOBAL EQUITY \"F\" (SGD) ACC","LU1988902786.USD":"FULLERTON LUX FUNDS GLOBAL ABSOLUTE ALPHA \"I\" (USD) ACC","NFLX":"奈飞","LU1674673691.USD":"HSBC GIF GLOBAL LOWER CARBON EQUITY \"AD\" (USD) INC","LU0210533765.USD":"JPM GLOBAL GROWTH \"A\" (USD) ACC","BK4524":"宅经济概念","LU1674673428.USD":"HSBC GIF GLOBAL LOWER CARBON EQUITY \"AC\" (USD) ACC","LU0786609619.USD":"高盛全球千禧一代股票组合Acc","LU1064131342.USD":"Fullerton Lux Funds - Global Absolute Alpha A Acc USD","LU2543165471.USD":"E FUND (HK) GLOBAL QUALITY GROWTH \"A\" (USD) ACC","SG9999004303.SGD":"Nikko AM Shenton Global Opportunities SGD","LU2362541513.USD":"WELLINGTON NEXT GENERATION GLOBAL EQUITY \"A\" (USD) ACC","BK4527":"明星科技股","LU0942090050.USD":"UBS (LUX) EQUITY SICAV - US TOTAL YIELD SUSTAINABLE \"P\" (USD)  INC","LU0097036916.USD":"贝莱德美国增长A2 USD","LU0256863811.USD":"ALLIANZ US EQUITY \"A\" INC","LU1621768115.EUR":"AZ EQUITY GLOBAL INFRASTRUCTURE \"B\" (EUR) INC","LU0130517989.USD":"HARRIS ASSOCIATES US VALUE EQUITY \"R\" INC","IE00B19Z8X17.USD":"FTGF CLEARBRIDGE US LARGE CAP GROWTH  \"AG\" (USD) ACC","LU0976567544.SGD":"FTIF - Templeton Global Income A Mdis SGD-H1","LU1267930730.SGD":"富兰克林美国机遇基金AS Acc SGD (CPF)","SGXZ23171101.USD":"NIKKO AM SHENTON GLOBAL OPPORTUNITIES (USD) ACC","LU2362541273.HKD":"WELLINGTON NEXT GENERATION GLOBAL EQUITY \"A\" (HKD) ACC","LU0109391861.USD":"富兰克林美国机遇基金A Acc","LU2357305700.SGD":"Allianz Global Artificial Intelligence ET H2-SGD","LU0210536198.USD":"JPM US GROWTH \"A\" ACC","LU1069344957.HKD":"AB SICAV I - AMERICAN GROWTH PORTFOLIO \"AD\" (HKD) INC","LU0477156953.USD":"HARRIS ASSOCIATES US VALUE EQUITY \"RE\" (USD) ACC","LU2896262040.SGD":"JPM US GROWTH FUND \"A\" (SGD) ACC","LU1989764664.SGD":"CPR Invest - Global Disruptive Opportunities A2 Acc SGD-H","LU0496365809.HKD":"TEMPLETON GLOBAL INCOME \"A\" (HKD) INC (Q)","LU2361045086.USD":"WELLINGTON US QUALITY GROWTH \"A\" (USD) ACC","LU0127658192.USD":"EASTSPRING INVESTMENTS GLOBAL TECHNOLOGY \"A\" (USD) ACC","LU0006306889.USD":"SCHRODER ISF US LARGE CAP \"A\" (USD) INC AV","LU2361044865.SGD":"WELLINGTON US QUALITY GROWTH \"A\" (SGDHDG) ACC","IE00BFXG1179.USD":"BNY MELLON U.S. EQUITY INCOME \"B\" (USD) INC","BK4581":"高盛持仓","BK4532":"文艺复兴科技持仓","LU1046421795.USD":"富达环球科技A-ACC","LU0648001328.SGD":"Natixis Harris Associates US Equity RA SGD","LU0868494617.USD":"UBS (LUX) EQUITY SICAV - US TOTAL YIELD SUSTAINABLE \"P\" (USD) ACC","LU2361044949.HKD":"WELLINGTON US QUALITY GROWTH \"A\" (HKD) ACC","LU1201861249.SGD":"Natixis Harris Associates US Equity PA SGD-H","LU0980610538.SGD":"Natixis Harris Associates US Equity RA SGD-H","BK4534":"瑞士信贷持仓","LU0882574139.USD":"富达环球消费行业基金A ACC","LU2362540622.SGD":"WELLINGTON NEXT GENERATION GLOBAL EQUITY \"A\" (SGDHDG) ACC","LU0149725797.USD":"汇丰美国股市经济规模基金","LU0079474960.USD":"联博美国增长基金A","LU0106261372.USD":"SCHRODER ISF US LARGE CAP \"A\" ACC","LU2384288077.EUR":"AZ EQUITY GLOBAL INFRASTRUCTURE \"A-INS\" (EUR) ACC","LU0417517546.SGD":"Allianz US Equity Cl AT Acc SGD","BK4515":"5G概念","WBD":"WARNER BROS DISCOVERY INC","LU1720051017.SGD":"Allianz Global Artificial Intelligence AT Acc H2-SGD","LU1778281490.HKD":"HSBC GIF GLOBAL LOWER CARBON EQUITY \"AD\" (HKD) INC","IE00BKPKM429.USD":"NEUBERGER BERMAN GLOBAL SUSTAINABLE EQUITY \"A\" (USD) ACC","LU0353189680.USD":"富国美国全盘成长基金Cl A Acc","LU0203202063.USD":"AB SICAV I - ALL MARKET INCOME PORTFOLIO \"A2X\" (USD) ACC","BK4548":"巴美列捷福持仓","LU0077335932.USD":"FIDELITY AMERICAN GROWTH \"A\" INC","LU1035775433.USD":"AB SICAV I - AMERICAN GROWTH PORTFOLIO \"AD\" (USD) INC","LU0203201768.USD":"AB SICAV I - ALL MARKET INCOME PORTFOLIO \"AX\" (USD) INC","LU0642271901.SGD":"Janus Henderson Horizon Global Technology Leaders A2 SGD-H","LU0082616367.USD":"摩根大通美国科技A（dist）","LU0320765059.SGD":"FTIF - Franklin US Opportunities A Acc SGD","IE00BZ1G4Q59.USD":"LEGG MASON CLEARBRIDGE US EQUITY SUSTAINABILITY LEADER \"A\"(USD) INC (A)","IE00BSNM7G36.USD":"NEUBERGER BERMAN SYSTEMATIC GLOBAL SUSTAINABLE VALUE \"A\" (USD) ACC","SGXZ51526630.SGD":"大华环球创新基金A Acc SGD","LU1621768206.USD":"AZ EQUITY GLOBAL INFRASTRUCTURE \"AAZ\" (USD) ACC","LU1316542783.SGD":"Janus Henderson Horizon Global Technology Leaders A2 SGD","BK4585":"ETF&股票定投概念","LU1127390331.HKD":"AB SICAV I - ALL MARKET INCOME PORTFOLIO \"A\" (HKD) ACC","LU2326559502.SGD":"Natixis Loomis Sayles US Growth Equity P/A SGD-H","LU2264538146.SGD":"Fullerton Lux Funds - Global Absolute Alpha A Acc SGD","LU2108987350.USD":"UBS (LUX) EQUITY SICAV GLOBAL OPPORTUNITY SUSTAINABLE (USD) \"P\" (USD) ACC","IE00BQXX3D17.EUR":"GUINNESS GLOBAL INNOVATORS \"C\" (EUR) ACC","LU2552382058.USD":"WELLINGTON US BRAND POWER \"A\" (USD) ACC","BK4587":"ChatGPT概念","SGXZ99366536.SGD":"United Global Innovation A Acc SGD-H","LU1429558221.USD":"Natixis Loomis Sayles US Growth Equity RA USD","LU1435385759.SGD":"Natixis Loomis Sayles US Growth Equity RA SGD-H","IE00BQXX3C00.GBP":"GUINNESS GLOBAL INNOVATORS \"C\" (GBP) ACC","LU2552382132.HKD":"WELLINGTON US BRAND POWER \"A\" (HKD) ACC","LU1548497426.USD":"安联环球人工智能AT Acc","IE00BQXX3F31.USD":"GUINNESS GLOBAL INNOVATORS \"C\" (USD) ACC","LU1621767810.EUR":"AZ EQUITY GLOBAL INFRASTRUCTURE \"A\" (EUR) INC","LU1720051108.HKD":"ALLIANZ GLOBAL ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE \"AT\" (HKD) ACC","LU1621767737.EUR":"AZ EQUITY GLOBAL INFRASTRUCTURE \"AAZ\" (EUR) ACC","LU0672654240.SGD":"FTIF - Franklin US Opportunities A Acc SGD-H1","LU2087625088.SGD":"ALLSPRING  US ALL CAP GROWTH \"A\" (SGDHDG) ACC","BK4550":"红杉资本持仓","BK4588":"碎股","BK4108":"电影和娱乐","LU0211326755.USD":"TEMPLETON GLOBAL INCOME \"A\" (USD) ACC","LU1571399168.USD":"ALLSPRING GLOBAL LONG/SHORT EQUITY \"IP\" (USD) ACC","LU1814569148.SGD":"WELLINGTON GLOBAL QUALITY GROWTH \"D\" (SGDHDG) ACC","BK4507":"流媒体概念","IE00BKVL7J92.USD":"Legg Mason ClearBridge - US Equity Sustainability Leaders A Acc USD","BK4598":"佩洛西持仓","BK4551":"寇图资本持仓","LU2552382215.SGD":"WELLINGTON US BRAND POWER \"A\" (SGDHDG) ACC","LU0211326839.USD":"TEMPLETON GLOBAL INCOME \"A\" (USD) INC","LU0234572021.USD":"高盛美国核心股票组合Acc","IE00B19Z9505.USD":"美盛-美国大盘成长股A Acc","BK4125":"广播","LU1366192091.USD":"ALLIANZ US EQUITY PLUS \"AM\" (USD) INC","LU0256863902.USD":"ALLIANZ US EQUITY \"AT\" (USD) ACC","IE00B19Z8W00.USD":"FTGF CLEARBRIDGE US LARGE CAP GROWTH \"A\" INC","BK4115":"综合电信业务","LU0130102774.USD":"Natixis Harris Associates US Equity RA USD","BK4566":"资本集团","LU0868494708.USD":"UBS (LUX) EQUITY SICAV - US TOTAL YIELD SUSTAINABLE \"P\" (USD) INC","LU0215105999.USD":"SCHRODER ISF GLOBAL EQUITY \"A\" ACC","LU0708995401.HKD":"FRANKLIN U.S. OPPORTUNITIES \"A\" (HKD) ACC","LU2860962120.EUR":"CPR INVEST - ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE \"A2\" (EUR) ACC A","LU0234570918.USD":"高盛全球核心股票组合Acc Close","LU0225283273.USD":"SCHRODER ISF GLOBAL EQUITY ALPHA \"A\" (USD) ACC","LU0353189763.USD":"ALLSPRING  US ALL CAP GROWTH FUND \"I\" (USD) ACC","LU1823568750.SGD":"Fidelity Global Technology A-ACC SGD","SGXZ81514606.USD":"大华环球创新基金A Acc USD","LU2461242641.AUD":"WELLINGTON US QUALITY GROWTH \"A\" (AUDHDG) ACC"},"source_url":"https://dowjonesnews.com/newdjn/logon.aspx?AL=N","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2589829494","content_text":"Like all the old Hollywood studios, Warner Bros. has taken a twisted path into the present, filled with mergers and acquisitions—the latest a proposed sale to Netflix for $82.7 billion, including assumed debt. Some have worked out well and some haven’t, but the good ones are all long in the rearview mirror.The 1950s heralded the end of the studio system of Hollywood’s Golden Era. The studios began to see competition from television, and they lost their theater chains to antitrust action by the U.S. Department of Justice. In dire need of cash, Warner Bros. made one of the worst media deals of all time in 1956, selling off its entire pre-1948 film library just as TV stations were about to need those old movies and cartoons to fill their schedules.Like many studios, Warner was adrift for years. As U.S. culture changed in the 1960s, Warner and the other studios had trouble keeping up, and that was the last straw.In 1967 an aging Jack Warner still owned a controlling interest in the studio and sold it to a film distribution company named Seven Arts to form Warner Bros.-Seven Arts. But Seven Arts had bitten off more than it could chew. After a string of flops in 1968 and 1969, the company was sold to Steve Ross’s Kinney National, which owned mortuaries, parking lots, and other decidedly nonentertainment businesses. The studio was re-christened again, this time as Warner Communications.Thus began the best years for Warner both financially and creatively since the 1930s. It had production and distribution for film, television and music as these were all burgeoning in the 1970s. In 1990 it added publishing with Time Inc. It also brought a cable television system that combined with Warner’s to create one of the largest systems in the U.S., just as cable TV was about to boom. The new company was called Time Warner.The 1996 addition of Turner Broadcasting brought cable channels, the pre-1986 MGM film library, a plethora of cartoons, and the return of the pre-1948 Warner library, bringing Casablanca and Bugs Bunny back home.Though there was reported friction between the button-down publishers at Time and the laid-back Hollywood scene, the 1990s were peak Warner. The film studio pumped out hits and was finding new distribution channels internationally and with home video. Stuffed with ad pages, it was a high point for magazine publishing. The TV studio produced many of the top shows on U.S. television, including Seinfeld, Friends, and ER, all of which are still raking in cash today. The WB broadcast network started up. Cable subscriptions were expanding. CNN set the standard for television news, and the Turner networks added sports. Warner/Elektra/Atlantic was the largest distributor of music in the industry’s best decade.But like Warner’s first golden era, this one also ended with a new medium: the internet. Old-media companies were justifiably concerned that it would disrupt their businesses, and with hindsight we know they were right to be scared. Time Warner CEO Gerald Levin thought the answer was another merger, this time with the premier internet service at a time when dial-up connections were still king—America Online. Despite being the smaller company, AOL was valued more highly than Time Warner in the 2001 all-stock deal that formed AOL-Time Warner.This was a disastrous hookup of old and new media. The promised “synergies” never materialized. The World Wide Web overtook AOL’s walled-garden model of the internet. Most important, the timing couldn’t have been worse, with the deal being announced two months before the dot-com crash. Eventually, $99 billion of the $165 billion merger was written down. AOL was just sold in October for a reported $1.4 billion.The merger strategy that had been so successful for 30 years fell flat on its face, and since then, Warner has faced another long period of struggle.In 2018, with many parts severed from Warner like AOL and Time Warner Cable, AT&T bought the studio, renaming it WarnerMedia. But just three years later it saw the strategic error of larding on $44 billion in debt (including assumed debt) to buy Warner’s flagging properties. By 2022, AT&T had merged it with Discovery’s cable channels and spun it off asWarner Bros. Discovery—a pastiche of old media—which it remains today.Every media merger is different, but among these episodes the Netflix-Warner hookup most closely resembles the Seven Arts deal. Like Netflix, Seven Arts began as distribution for a new medium, in this case TV. Seven Arts bought TV rights from studios and packaged them together to sell to TV stations. Like Netflix, Seven Arts started making its own content when the studios weren’t producing enough. And like Netflix, it turned to acquiring a distressed old media company to add more content and production.This doesn’t mean the Netflix-Warner deal is doomed, but it highlights the integration challenges to Netflix as it brings in a sprawling old-media company.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"NFLX":1.95,"WBD":1.96}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":214,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":460037719577024,"gmtCreate":1753332526968,"gmtModify":1753333794259,"author":{"id":"4097734155216680","authorId":"4097734155216680","name":"azam.a","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6ad35c4d99135e1f172a209f9042b94d","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4097734155216680","authorIdStr":"4097734155216680"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Share your opinion about this news…","listText":"Share your opinion about this news…","text":"Share your opinion about this news…","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/460037719577024","repostId":"1170541813","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"1170541813","kind":"news","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Dow Jones publishes the world’s most trusted business news and financial information in a variety of media.","home_visible":1,"media_name":"Dow Jones","id":"1012688067","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/150f88aa4d182df19190059f4a365e99"},"pubTimestamp":1753329069,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1170541813?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2025-07-24 11:51","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Why Broadcom's Stock Is Getting a Boost After Alphabet's Earnings","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1170541813","media":"Dow Jones","summary":"Alphabet investors might not quite know what to make of Alphabet's new, higher spending forecast, but Broadcom investors seem to like it.Shares of the semiconductor giant are up about 3% in...","content":"<html><head></head><body><p>Alphabet investors might not quite know what to make of Alphabet&#39;s new, higher spending forecast, but Broadcom investors seem to like it.</p><p>Shares of the semiconductor giant are up about 3% in Wednesday&#39;s extended session after Alphabet said it now plans to dole out $85 billion on capital expenditures this year, versus its prior forecast of $75 billion.</p><p>While Alphabet has a custom chip that it&#39;s designed, Broadcom helps produce it. Alphabet&#39;s management shared on the earnings call that in the latest quarter, most of its capex went toward technical infrastructure, with about two thirds of that going toward servers and the other third going toward data centers and networking equipment.</p><p><em><br/></em></p></body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Why Broadcom's Stock Is Getting a Boost After Alphabet's Earnings</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nWhy Broadcom's Stock Is Getting a Boost After Alphabet's Earnings\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1012688067\">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/150f88aa4d182df19190059f4a365e99);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Dow Jones </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2025-07-24 11:51</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<html><head></head><body><p>Alphabet investors might not quite know what to make of Alphabet&#39;s new, higher spending forecast, but Broadcom investors seem to like it.</p><p>Shares of the semiconductor giant are up about 3% in Wednesday&#39;s extended session after Alphabet said it now plans to dole out $85 billion on capital expenditures this year, versus its prior forecast of $75 billion.</p><p>While Alphabet has a custom chip that it&#39;s designed, Broadcom helps produce it. Alphabet&#39;s management shared on the earnings call that in the latest quarter, most of its capex went toward technical infrastructure, with about two thirds of that going toward servers and the other third going toward data centers and networking equipment.</p><p><em><br/></em></p></body></html>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AVGO":"博通"},"source_url":"","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1170541813","content_text":"Alphabet investors might not quite know what to make of Alphabet's new, higher spending forecast, but Broadcom investors seem to like it.Shares of the semiconductor giant are up about 3% in Wednesday's extended session after Alphabet said it now plans to dole out $85 billion on capital expenditures this year, versus its prior forecast of $75 billion.While Alphabet has a custom chip that it's designed, Broadcom helps produce it. Alphabet's management shared on the earnings call that in the latest quarter, most of its capex went toward technical infrastructure, with about two thirds of that going toward servers and the other third going toward data centers and networking equipment.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AVGO":1.1}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":290,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}