Leaderboard

You know they all know these complications, right? They didn’t come into something like this without thinking through the complexities even if not every detail is laid out just yet.

It does not make sense to separate msnbc, cnbc, & USA from NBC. The other channels, I can understand getting rid of them.

But what do you about the channel still owned by News Corp in Australia? Unless you toss a lot of money at Rupert to buy the Sky branding outright, that's still a fly in the ointment.

Could there possibly be a plan afoot to create a larger worldwide news organization by combining other Comcast news assets - which are also losing money - with MSNBC / CNBC into a single, streamlined news organization under their "Sky News" brand? Apparently, the Comcast acquisition of Sky only requires keeping Sky News in existence until 2028 - this could be an attempt to not only protect Comcast NBC but to help rescue Sky News UK / TG24 Italia simultaneously,

They did not say that. Lazarus said the new company could be a buyer of stations without specifying any station groups.

CNBC, from a strategy pov, could embrace being the Consumer News and Business Channel and be fine moving forward. It's MSNBC, USA and Syfy that would require some serious work. MSNBC needs a 'news' component and if they don't plan to combine resources with CNBC, then I'm not sure how successful the network will be without a news partner. Couple with a likely name change, if I was an employee at MSNBC, I would be very worried. USA and Syfy will require original programming to grow and prosper and hopefully there are big plans in the works for them. Overall, there are a lot of unanswered questions surrounding this new company....

For MSNBC, it might be that their opinion shows are hurting the brand of both the NBC network news and the affiliates' local news operations by association while no longer bringing in enough ratings to justify it. I'm just guessing, but I do recall reading years ago that FOX affiliates have complained about viewers confusing them with FOX News Channel, so it isn't a farfetched idea. I'm less sure what the strategy is with USA and CNBC. USA seems to just be a dumping ground now for the sporting events that used to air on NBCSN, so maybe they think they can just move all that content to Peacock and viewers will get used to it. There isn't an obvious replacement for CNBC and unlike the others, it's an international brand.

It's also a valuable domain name they wouldn't want to fall into the hands of a competitor. Especially since it's still a homophone!

It's doubly bizarre as USA Network is launching in Canada on New Year's Day as part of their various cable network shuffles, but it's just Discovery with an anonymized coat of paint.

I would say over the last few years MSNBC & CNBC have become much less intertwined with NBC News than before. While reporters appear on both NBC & MSNBC, most MSNBC anchors now stay exclusively to MSNBC. NBC's Andrea Mitchell announced she will no longer host an hour on MSNBC a few weeks ago, the only other MSNBC anchor who also anchors on NBC is Jose Diaz-Balart. I guess you could include Willie Geist who does both Morning Joe & NBC's Sunday Today, but even then that's 2 anchors for the entire network that share an anchor role with both MSNBC & NBC News. I would say NBC News Now is already directly competing with MSNBC as opposed to acting as a companion. They don't cross promote each other or collaborate at all. I watch MSNBC quite often and they don't even acknowledge NBC News Now exists. When it's a slow news day MSNBC Reports will check in with someone from CNBC but there is zero synergy between MSNBC & the NBC News streaming channel. It's even rare when anything from NBC News gets mentioned. Before NBC News Now was launched, NBC would use MSNBC for special reports when breaking news happened at unexpected times, but even that rarely happens now. When it comes to splitting staff and covering events, I think it will be much less difficult to separate them now compared to 5 or 10 years ago. It's kind of like NBC & MSNBC already divorced but have continued living in the same house even after NBC has already moved on with NBC News Now. As for why Bravo is staying, they probably feel losing the Bravo escapism dreck would harm Peacock, so they don't want to part with it.

It's escapism dreck that makes a lot of money and isn't ending soon, and Andy Cohen's made them a lot of it. I can't blame them for keeping that at least in-house, and I suspect if E! still had the Kardashians that network wouldn't have been spun-off later.

I believe that is due at least in part to the fact that the Polish channel is still named SciFi because Syfy is similar to the Polish language word for syphilis.

Appears Morning Joe is ready to kiss and make up with Trump.