Return to Transcripts main page

Quest Means Business

Trump's Hopes For Quick Meeting With Putin Stalls Out; Hungary Pulling Out Of International Court; Shutdown Ties For Second Longest In U.S. History; A.I. Fuels Market Rally Despite Concerns Over Returns; Warner Bros. Discovery Shares Spike As Company Weighs Buyout Offers; Netflix Shares Fall After Hours On Q3 Earning Miss. Aired 4-4:45p ET

Aired October 21, 2025 - 16:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[16:00:15]

RICHARD QUEST, CNN INTERNATIONAL HOST, "QUEST MEANS BUSINESS": Closing bell ringing on Wall Street. They're getting all excited at H.B. Fuller. My

word, madam, control yourself. Let's see what it is like when they hit the gavel. Markets, solid green throughout the course of the session. One. My

goodness. She did it. She lost that top of the gavel.

I mean, if I've ever seen determination to destroy the gavel, we will show you that again before the end of the program. That was a real -- and you

see there the market. No particular reason for this sudden boost in green, but the market has been up all day. There is an enormous amount to get to.

Those are the markets and the stories that we will be following today.

A planned meeting between President Trump and Putin in Budapest, it now appears to be off. I will be speaking to Hungary's Foreign Minister about

what comes next.

Our parent company, Warner Bros Discovery -- WBD has put on the for sale sign. And diverging fortunes between high and low earners, it is called the

K-Shaped economy. We will explain.

We are live in London again. Tuesday, October the 21st. I am Richard Quest and in London, I mean business.

Good evening.

We begin tonight with a dashing of hopes. President Trump has said a quick summit with Vladimir Putin have stalled out, not going to take place. The

administration now says there are no plans for the leaders to meet in the immediate future, which is a change in tune from last Thursday. Then Mr.

Trump said on Truth Social, they would meet within a week or so. The timeline highly unlikely, and even a meeting between the U.S. Secretary of

State Marco Rubio and his Russian counterpart, Sergey Lavrov is off for the time being.

They spoke on the phone and had such differing views on how the conflict would end. Basically, it wasn't worth them getting together as Mr. Lavrov

explained.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SERGEY LAVROV, RUSSIAN FOREIGN MINISTER (through translator): Now, when we hear from Washington that we must stop immediately and that we must not

discuss anything further, stop and let history judge; if we simply stop, that will mean forgetting about the root causes of the conflict, which

Donald Trump's administration has clearly understood and voiced.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

QUEST: So it is confusing, but let's try and unpack it bit by bit. Last week, of course, there was the meeting at The White House between Zelenskyy

and Donald Trump when Donald Trump allegedly said or supposedly said that he wanted it to be a ceasefire at existing lines. Then Zelenskyy spoke to

Europeans and they agreed to start peace talks on the basis of current lines, and that's what this looks like.

If you take it, you've got the two sides and the two regions in the east, the Donetsk Region and Luhansk Region, together they are called the Donbas.

And the idea, of course, is that Donald Trump and indeed the Europeans are and now, Zelenskyy seems to be start here as a way to then get your

ceasefire and then go into your negotiations.

However, President Putin wants something different. He wants all that part of the region given up as part of a settlement to end the war. Now, right

now, Russia controls essentially all of Luhansk and 75 percent of Donetsk Region, and what he wants, of course, is the lot.

Jim Sciutto is in Washington.

Jim, you can see the difference between this. But what I am trying to understand as a starting point for the negotiations and the discussions as

a way to stop the fighting, why is this difference so contentious?

JIM SCIUTTO CNN ANCHOR: Well, listen, for Ukrainian leaders and for the Ukrainian people, giving up their sovereign territory is an issue, quite an

understandable one. It is their country. Russia took it by force. They don't want to give it up permanently to Russia.

They certainly don't want to recognize it legally, nor does Europe, frankly, because Europe doesn't want to reward military action with land

taken by military action.

And, you know, Richard, someone, a Ukrainian official told me a long time ago, they said, if you think land is a political issue, say, in Europe or

the States, in Ukraine, it is a political issue because the Ukrainian leader has to explain it to 200,000 mothers, right, who lost their sons and

daughters in the fighting.

[16:05:12]

So it is an extremely sensitive issue.

Now, we know anyone negotiating anything of this war, this goes back to the Biden administration, by the way, has said quietly, it is unlikely Ukraine

gets back all of its territory. So the question is, how do you square that circle? Right?

And the biggest issue with the recent negotiation in recent days from Trump was that Trump seemed to be telling Zelenskyy, you have to give up even

more territory than Russia has already taken by force, all of Donetsk for instance, and that was just a nonstarter.

QUEST: But we are not even -- but the difficulty here is, you had Donald Trump, first of all -- I mean, let's ignore the comments about you could

win it all back and now, he is pulling that back.

You know, you first of all were going to have a leaders summit, then you're going to have a meeting of top ministers, Lavrov and Rubio. Even that's now

off the table, which I guess from Ukraine's point of view is just an -- you know, they see this as just Putin's opportunity to continue the fight.

SCIUTTO: Yes. And I would bet, Richard, there is a little bit of relief in Kyiv in that they were worried that Trump was turning on them. Right? That

Trump was now applying new pressure on them to get to the finish line of a deal, to say, you know what, Ukraine, you've got to give up even more than

Russia has already taken.

Now, Russia seems to be saying, we don't feel in any rush to even talk about an end to this war, which, you know, disappointment for President

Trump. But from Ukraine's perspective, listen, they don't want the war to continue, but they also don't want it to end on someone else's terms.

And the thing about Trump and, you know, one could be forgiven for having whiplash over the last several days. He was considering tomahawks to help

Ukraine then no tomahawks and putting new pressure on Ukraine to give up more territory, and now Russia wasn't even happy with that. Right?

So were back to square one.

QUEST: Right. We will talk -- thank you. I am grateful, Jim. And of course, you'll be with us -- you will be briefing us on all matters in a couple of

hours. The President had said his summit would take place in Budapest.

Hungary is a unique role in the dynamic between the West and Russia. It is a member of both the E.U. of course, and of NATO. But the Prime Minister,

Viktor Orban, has broken on numerous occasions with Europe.

First of all praising the kremlin as hyper rational, saying Ukraine would never fulfill its hopes of joining the E.U. or NATO and as somebody firmly

on the right, Mr. Viktor Orban is a favorite of President Trump. Mr. Trump frequently quotes him.

The Hungarian Foreign Minister, Peter Szijjarto, a good friend of QUEST MEANS BUSINESS and the minister is with me now.

You obviously are disappointed this summit will not take place or that meetings will not take place. Are you able to shed any light on why you

think it is not been possible?

PETER SZIJJARTO, HUNGARIAN FOREIGN MINISTER: Look, first of all, we are very happy with the fact that the two presidents have talked to each other.

We are happy with the fact that there is a hope for a summit between the two, and I will tell you why? Because we are a Central European country

with a very unique history and we know that whenever the Russians and the Americans are able to keep up a civilized relationship, the world is a

safer place and Central Europe is a safer place as well.

From the very first moment that this summit was announced to take place, I was pretty sure that there would be leaks, news, fake news statements on a

daily basis. Dozens and dozens claiming that it will not happen because I know that many are contra-interested in this meeting happening.

QUEST: Don't put one and one together and come up with three. At the end of the day. I mean, the meeting isn't happening, and it is not as a result of

fake news media. It is because for whatever diplomatic reasons, it can't take place at the moment.

So my question then would be to you, is it still your hope it will take place at some point? And is Budapest, is your government still willing to

host it at that time?

SZIJJARTO: Obviously we are ready. We would love peace to come back to Central Europe. We have been representing the cause of peace for the last

three-and-a-half years. Whatever we can do, we do. We were asked to host this summit. We are ready to host this summit. We will provide the

participants with all necessary circumstances to be successful.

I am pretty hopeful that this summit will take place. There was no -- sorry, there was no date set yet.

[16:10:10]

So I cannot understand what postponement means in case there was no date set yet. So I really do hope -- I really do hope that during my meeting

with Secretary Rubio tomorrow, I will have a much clearer picture.

I know that the two colleagues of mine, Secretary Rubio and Minister Lavrov have talked to each other yesterday. I understood that they have been

speaking about conceptual issues. I do hope that they will come to some kind of a common understanding, which will be a good basis for this summit

to happen.

You know, the main thing for me is that the summit happens because -- because once they talk to each other, there is a much bigger hope for peace

compared to if they do not talk to each other.

QUEST: All right, on this question of the summit, and I understand the logistics of getting President Putin into an E.U. country are somewhat

complex because of the warrant from the ICC. I understand that, but there is a good example of the of the disagreement or the split within the union.

For instance, the president of the council, the High Commissioner is commenting on Hungary hosting it, says basically he wishes you wouldn't

host it. He said it is regretful that he is actually -- regarding Budapest, not it is not nice to see that a person put to an arrest warrant is coming

to a European country, said Mr. Kallas.

That shows a difference of --

SZIJJARTO: Mrs. Kallas. Mrs. Kallas.

QUEST: I am sorry, Forgive me. Yes. Forgive me. I can't read my own writing. The that shows the difference of more than just nuance. I get you

want to hold the meeting? I get it, but are others in Europe in your partnership who are saying no, you shouldn't.

SZIJJARTO: Yes, we knew it from the very beginning that the news that we are asked to host this summit will frustrate our European colleagues pretty

much and that was reflected in the meeting of the foreign ministers yesterday, where I understood that they don't understand how it is possible

that a country which is supposed to be isolated, I mean, according to their opinion, hosts the most important summit in the last decades of the world.

But the fact is that it is not Hungary being isolated. This is the European Union being isolated. If you look at the current security crisis of the

globe, E.U. does not have a role in solving these crises -- any of these crises with a good reason, because if you are pro-war, if you are digging

deeper into conflicts, if you are fueling conflicts, you will be not invited to a table where peace is to be made.

So we understand very clearly that our European colleagues are frustrated with this fact. Look, when it comes to ICC, President Putin was in the

United States during the summer and he was not arrested. If he comes to Hungary, he is not going to be arrested, either. And I do hope that those

E.U. member states, which lay on the possible flight route of President Trump to Hungary, will allow him fly through because this is a hope to make

peace that the two of them meet.

And if someone and if someone -- sorry, and if someone doesn't allow -- any country doesn't allow the Russian President to fly through, it means that

they don't want peace.

QUEST: Where do you stand and have you taken a position between the now seemingly E.U.-U.S.-Zelenskyy view of start from the current front line

versus the Russian position, which would be all Donbas, the whole region.

SZIJJARTO: Well, first of all, we don't have a position on that because we are not party to the war. We only do have one position that this war will

not end on the battlefield. This war will end only around the negotiating table. So as long as there are no negotiations, this war will not stop.

So therefore it is them to agree -- it is them to agree. The only thing what we can do is to, provide them with all necessary circumstances and

preconditions in order to be successful in negotiations. I know one thing. This bloodshed must end. But this will not end on the battlefield. This

will only end through diplomacy, through negotiations around the negotiating table, and we are ready to provide the place and the necessary

conditions for that.

QUEST: Last question on the ICC itself and I understand the U.S. isn't a member, et cetera., et cetera. Lots of countries are not members, but

you're going the exceptional way. You are a member. The E.U. membership through its countries, why do you want to leave next year? What is it about

the ICC that has done such sterling work bringing warlords and dictators to proper justice? When if you leave, there is no alternative to the ICC?

[16:15:10]

SZIJJARTO: Well, actually we do see ICC as a political body. We do ICC humiliating the phenomenon of court procedures and court type operation.

When the ICC has put a warrant on Prime Minister Netanyahu, it became obvious that this is a political institution and we cannot accept if a

court acts as a political institution.

So when Prime Minister Netanyahu was in Budapest, we have hosted him properly. Obviously, we have not arrested him. We are leaving ICC because

this became a political and unserious. But then I tell you why I say unserious because they have issued a warrant on a Hamas leader who was dead

already in order to show that they kind of compensate after the arrest, warning on Prime Minister Netanyahu.

So this is an unserious political body. That's why we decided to leave it.

QUEST: Right, Minister, I will call you Peter. You've been on the program often enough, and I am sure you don't mind. It is good to have you on the

program tonight, Peter. Thank you very much indeed.

SZIJJARTO: Thank you so much for the opportunity.

QUEST: Thank you.

Now, as we continue, well, take a look at this. It is the letter K. So what is it about the letter K that is so fascinating when we talk about

economics? After the break we will explain.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:19:07]

QUEST: Can you believe it? The U.S. government has now been shut for 21 days because of the lack of funding, and that is now the same mark as in

the mid-1990s.

President Trump has been meeting Republican lawmakers, congratulating them on confirming his various appointments. But there is no such relief for

unpaid federal workers and the president has shown no desire at the moment to compromise with Democrats on their issue of health care spending.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Unfortunately, in a craven and pointless act of partisan spite, Chuck Schumer, who I've

known for a long time and the radical left Democrats are holding the entire federal government hostage to appease the extremists in their party.

We will not be extorted on this crazy plot of theirs. They've never done this before. Nobody has. You always vote for an extension. Chuck Schumer

and the Senate Democrats need to vote for the clean, bipartisan C.R. and reopen our government.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[16:20:10]

QUEST: Now, apart from the federal workers, the shutdown is having a direct effect, whether its farmers and small businesses, a whole load of

businesses that rely on government contracts. And it is one more factor that's contributing to what is now being called the K-shaped economy. Why

the K-shaped economy? Because on the upper branch, you have the high earners whose investments are soaring, secure jobs are continuing to spend.

That's this bit.

At the lower part, the low income and middle income housing feeling the pinch of inflation about worries of jobs, and as we look at the total of

the whole thing, if you take, for example, on the top bit, you've got consumer sentiment, current consumer sentiment, where stock owners have

strong positive and that we see that, for example, in the way people are spending.

The airlines, for example, Delta and American, they are selling premium seats, expensive ones at the front where you turn left, not right. They are

still selling very strongly. Compare that with the budget airlines of Spirit and Frontier -- Spirit, of course, very -- at a bankruptcy and

struggling to sell cheap seats no matter how low the price goes.

And It is not just in travel. Let's take for example, goods and expensive goods. Why is LVMH doing so well? It is at the top part of the K-curve and

on the other side, proving the point, rising auto loan delinquencies. Again, those who don't have money are finding it very difficult.

And if you want the archetypal traditionally snacks -- biscuits, fast food does okay. They are not quite recession proof, but they are recession

resistant. We are not seeing that. Certain ones, like McDonald's, for example, are actually having to offer discounts with low income customers

spending less.

This is a classic case of the K-shaped economy actually, in real life, in action now.

Carl Frey is an Associate Professor of A.I., the professor works at the Oxford Internet Institute. Good to see you, sir. Thank you very much.

Your book to me is fascinating. You've written this excellent book. It is called "How Progress Ends Technology, Innovation and the Fate of Nations."

Before we talk, the book, the K-shaped economy. We've seen it before, but we've never seen it in quite such stark relief where I am all right, Jack

is really doing very well and although the bottom isn't desperate, it is well on its way.

CARL FREY, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR OF A.I., OXFORD INTERNET INSTITUTE: I think that's right. And what we've been seeing over the past year has been

soaring share prices. That has had a wealth effect where you see asset rich individuals, which tend to be at the higher end of the income distribution,

going out, spending more and spending more on luxury goods in particular.

If you take the top 10 percent of people in the U.S., they are now accounting for roughly 50 percent of consumer spending, which is

extraordinary. And what you're seeing at the same time is that A.I. is beginning for the first time to really have an impact on the labor market,

having an impact on entry level work, in particular and that is pushing down wages, pushing down incomes at the lower end of the income

distribution.

QUEST: You then get, for example, the one big beautiful bill, which exacerbates it. You get a government shutdown and you end up with a

hardening of the inequality and the difference rather than a mitigation of it.

FREY: That's certainly right and I think what we are currently seeing is very likely to drive up interest rates and A.I. itself is driving up the

hurdle rate, which means that the more investment you see flowing into A.I., the higher the return that other sectors need to generate in order to

get investment. And so a lot of investment is just being soaked up by the A.I. economy, and that's having a real impact on jobs in other sectors,

too.

QUEST: Is there evidence that the A.I. investment and I think there is, is crowding out the other calls for capital, or is there enough to go around?

FREY: Well, we certainly saw that happening during the dot-com bubble and the rollout of fiber.

QUEST: Yes.

FREY: And that certainly contributed to the hollowing out of manufacturing industry in the United States in that period. I think the evidence this

time around is more anecdotal, but it certainly fits with what we saw during that period of time.

QUEST: But then if we factor in, there is a big wrinkle that's not been there before, which is the tariffs and the tariff and the industrial policy

of the united states to bring production back, which up to a certain point is working. Companies are opening factories and manufacturing plants, not

maybe on the scale they want to.

[16:25:19]

Does that continue?

FREY: Well, I don't know what the trade policy is going to be in a couple of weeks, so much from that --

QUEST: But if we take, for example, the technology and the innovation, the U.S. is still leading the way. Can you see that continuing?

FREY: Well, the title of my book is "How Progress Ends." And the key point I am trying to make, we are sitting here in Britain, nothing lasts forever.

British technological leadership didn't last forever. We are now two decades of slow productivity growth in Britain. And I think if you look to

the United States, many of the things that Britain got wrong, particularly in the postwar period around protectionism, around manufacturing industry

being cartelized, you're seeing similar trends playing out in the U.S. now with higher levels of market concentration and other barriers to foreign

trade, as well.

QUEST: A canary in the mine, perhaps. Good to see you, sir. Very grateful for you coming in. Thank you. Fascinating. Thank you very much.

FREY: Thank you very much.

QUEST: As we continue, busy day for media analysts, I really should have worn a sign that says "for sale." Because WBD has put itself up for sale.

We are on the block and Netflix has reported earnings. Is Netflix going to buy bits of me or anybody else? We will talk about it after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

QUEST: It is not every day we get a gavel breaking on Wall Street, but this woman was determined. It is Celeste Mastim, president and CEO of H.B.

Fuller. Look at that. She was absolutely -- yes, and she succeeded. Maybe because she is an adhesive manufacturing company, so she is hoping to sell

them a bit of glue to put the gavel back together again.

But you don't see it very often, but when you do, it was just that -- she was determined to break that thing.

[16:30:20]

As for the Dow, it hit a new record. It rose above 47,000 for the first time, and it's just below, there you go, just below that level. But it is a

rally and they've all been rallying. It's A.I. It's fueling the optimism as we talked about in our last guest, and despite over whether it actually

provides a return of investment. I should have said not despite but in spite of the fact it doesn't seemingly return.

Scale A.I. is working to address concerning working with clients Cisco, the Qatari government, the U.S. Defense Department. It builds A.I.

applications, and Jason Droege is the CEO of Scale A.I. Jason is with me.

Apologies I'm not with you in New York. I'm in London tonight.

Jason, we know -- here's the contradiction. We know A.I. is the future. We -- in the same way that we knew the dot.com of the internet was the future.

But the markets don't calibrate in the short term. And so we end up with this number. What is it -- what percentage of startups and A.I. companies

are not profitable? Is it 60 percent, 70 percent, 80 percent, 90 percent?

JASON DROEGE, CEO, SCALE A.I.: No, it has to be higher than that. Yes. I mean, it's at least that if not higher. I mean, we are -- we are definitely

in the high investment stage for all of these applications and businesses. And, you know, one stat that might be interesting is 95 percent of used

cases, 95 percent of problems that enterprises are trying to solve. They're not getting to production. They're not seeing value.

And so we're sort of at this stage where the narrative is that A.I. is changing everything, and it is changing a lot, and it will change a lot.

But with all technology adoption curves, you have to actually implement the technology the right way.

QUEST: So how do you at Scale A.I., knowing that, what are you proposing? What do you do? What magic wand do you wave that says this is the right

A.I., this is the right use? And the -- because really the word you're talking about is construction and execution of it.

DROEGE: Yes. That's right. I mean, Scale has a long history dealing with the foundation model.

QUEST: Right.

DROEGE: The, you know, the ChatGPTs, the Geminis of the world. We've been working with these types of models for over nine years. You know, ChatGPT,

in other words, you know, and others for the past few years. There is no magic wand. I think people who are selling a magic wand are selling, you

know, a book of goods that's not going to deliver. What you have to do in A.I., in enterprise A.I. is you have to pick the right problems to solve.

You have to get your data in order because everything is powered by data. And then you have to have a feedback loop to make these things better.

QUEST: So, Jason, why do we get it wrong? We got it wrong in the dot.com boom and bust. Admittedly there were many companies that could never have

made a profit, but we -- it begs the question, have we learned nothing? Or is this innate optimism that will always generate this bubble?

DROEGE: Well, I think, you know, our minds can get ahead of us. And the reality is, is when you deal with the real world, it takes longer to change

millions or billions of people in terms of how they work and governments. It just takes more time than it takes for us to imagine the potential

outcomes. So I think it's fun to get excited. I think there's use to it because the technology is transformative, but you got to do the right

things to get it done.

By the way, I don't think this is going to be 10 or 20 years. This is going to be a few years. It's just it's been sold as being a few months or a

month to an outcome.

QUEST: You know, I can't decide whether you are the Grinch at the party or whether you're taking -- you're sort of the person who turns up with a rain

cloud, or you're the actual realist that says, just give it a bit longer. Which are you?

DROEGE: Well, I've built a lot of businesses in my life, and I've been through this journey four or five times over the course of my history. And

so I have definitely seen this before. And the main thing that you got to do is you got to keep the faith, you got to keep investing. The outcomes

will come.

QUEST: So keep investing. What, in the companies or the market?

DROEGE: Well, no. Keep investing in the effort to apply A.I. to the business problems that you want to solve. Don't give up too early. Get

qualified partners. Make sure you understand what you're doing. Make sure you're choosing the right problems. But it's going to take time. It's not

going to take a month. It's going to, you know, it's not going to take, you know, it might take a year. It might take a few years. It's not going to

take 10 years. So the outcomes will come. But it's just not this like magic wand that it's being sold to be.

QUEST: I'm so grateful for you to come on tonight. Thank you very much in talking to us. I'm grateful.

DROEGE: Great. Thank you. Appreciate it.

QUEST: All right. Anybody want to buy me? CNN's parent company, Warner Brothers-Discovery says it's exploring options. Apparently there are

multiple buyout offers for the company, but just so that we are clear, CNN is part of Warner Bros. Discovery. Warner Bros. Discovery is now up for

sale.

[16:35:03]

The shares in the company soared 11 percent. WBD is in the midst of splitting the current plan of David Zaslav. The CEO is to split into two.

Apparently that process continues, but the board is said to have rejected the Paramount Skydance offer for the entire company ahead of the split.

Brian Stelter is with me.

And Brian, what does it feel like being up for sale? And as you are, I mean --

BRIAN STELTER, CNN CHIEF MEDIA ANALYST: That's right.

QUEST: Do you think that the split goes ahead and in some shape or form, the sexy streaming bit gets hived off somewhere else?

STELTER: It does seem that this is about trying to break up the assets in one way or another. Yes, the split was already underway. It's supposed to

take effect next spring, separating the streaming service HBO Max and the studio from the cable channels like CNN.

Now there's a new possibility on the table, Richard. As of today, it's a merger of the streaming and studios unit with some other company, with a

buyer, and then a spinoff of the linear channels. Comcast is going through something similar right now, spinning off most of its cable channels into a

separate company. So it does seem, one way or another, we're going to see some form of breakup.

QUEST: Right.

STELTER: There is right now one bidder, though, Paramount, that has made offers for all of WBD. I've been told by sources multiple offers by

Paramount have been rejected by WBD CEO David Zaslav and the board of directors.

QUEST: So --

STELTER: And now, as of today, there's an official sale process underway. So we knew there was a for sale sign on the door. But now it's official.

WHITFIELD: OK, so Netflix, Apple TV, Apple, I mean, who are the names as to the other suitors? And I ought to caveat this that we, you know, we don't

get any privileged information on this any more than anybody else, but your expertise, Brian, is so good that you've got some pretty good insights.

STELTER: Well, I've just been on the phone today, and it's clear to me that Comcast is going to take a look at this -- at these WBD assets. Comcast

already owns NBC Universal, giant movie studio, theme parks, a lot of cable channels. They're going to take a look at these assets because Zaslav is

signaling that they are clearly for sale.

It's obviously in Zaslav's interest to get a bidding war going publicly. There's been this going on behind the scenes, but this is now going to be a

public process, with Paramount making bids, with Zaslav trying to get other suitors as well. And you mentioned the other obvious names, Netflix and

Apple. But do these streamers, do these tech titans want to add on tens of billions dollars -- tens of billions of dollars' worth of assets as well as

debt? That is a very much unknown question.

And what happens to linear channels like CNN? That remains another big question here. It is quite possible that someone like Paramount or Comcast

will try to buy the streaming service and the movie studio, but then those cable channels like CNN and TNT, they may still be out on their own in some

form. There could be other buyers. What we're really talking about is I think we're probably in inning number three.

QUEST: Fascinating.

STELTER: If this is a nine inning baseball game, it's going to go on for a while. Well. we know it will go to extra innings.

QUEST: OK, I'm afraid you're going to have to start speaking cricket. Let's get real.

All right, Brian, you know, I'm trying to work out. I've been with the company, what, 25 years? Started at AOL, then we went to -- just on its

own, the split. Then we went to AT&T. Then we've gone to WBD. Now we've got -- there we go. Whatever. We are mere pawns in the game.

Brian, it is good to see you. Thank you, sir. You're watching it for me.

We're talking about Netflix and the company has just announced Q3. Revenue grew 17 percent and content is performing well. K-Pop "Demon Hunters"

became its most popular film. Shares fell as the company says it faced unexpected costs due to a tax dispute with Brazil.

Sara Fischer joins me now.

Let's put Brazil to one side. On balance, you know, talk of Netflix easing off and plateauing out is the perennial. But that doesn't seem to be the

case.

SARA FISCHER, CNN MEDIA ANALYST: No. And I don't think it's going to be the case. When it comes to Netflix, they have proven very skilled at juicing

more revenue out of their users. Of course, there are always going to be markets, I think about North America, that become saturated and you have to

move in on that process of increasing your ARPU, average revenue per user, a little bit more quickly.

But they've done a few things, Richard, to make investors, for the most part, feel optimistic about their strategy. One, they introduced an ad

supported tier. Huge. You can't be a streamer these days and expect to grow without having an ad supported option. And then two, huge, huge password

crackdowns, making sure that they're actually getting people to pay for the service if they are watching it. Those two things combined until now have

kept investors pretty optimistic.

[16:40:02]

QUEST: Right. OK, but that, if you like, is the plumbing of the whole thing. That is making sure you get the revenue. But on the content side,

when you hear the amount of money they spend on content, is that reflected in the viewership? Is that reflected in the quality of what they are

producing?

FISCHER: It is and it isn't. So every month, Nielsen, which is a third party measurement vendor, puts out a study where they say these are the

streamers that are getting tons of attention, and these are the ones that aren't.

Netflix is always up there, Richard. But I'll tell you, they pale in comparison to YouTube and YouTube, as you know, spends some big money on

Sunday's NFL ticket, but otherwise they don't put in the content spend that Netflix does because they rely on user generated content. So this is going

to be the big challenge of Netflix. They're not just competing with other streamers and programmers that spend billions of dollars on programing.

QUEST: Right.

FISCHER: Like Comcast, like WBD, but at the same time, it's YouTube.

QUEST: I think YouTube is an unfair competitor in a sense because they don't act -- I mean, they pay the people who put the stuff up in a sense,

but they don't actually produce anything. And they're a distributor in a sense. And, you know, anyway, quick question. Last question, very quickly.

Who do -- what do you think is the final outcome of WBD? What does it look like? Who owns us, do you think?

FISCHER: Well, I think Paramount is a pretty serious bidder, in part because David Ellison, the CEO of Paramount Skydance is the son of Larry

Ellison with unlimited coffers. And you have seen when they want an asset, whether it's Paramount or its UFC rights, they are not afraid to throw

billions of dollars at it.

The real question becomes, is there more value for shareholders in splitting the company into these two separate, publicly traded entities?

There are some rumors going around today that that might even be a tax benefit, versus taking a big lump sum from one bidder.

The question I have, Richard, is Paramount the only bidder interested in the whole thing?

QUEST: All right.

FISCHER: Because that's a big calculus. You have Comcast, Netflix, sure. Do they want to buy the cable nets?

QUEST: We will leave it there and we will talk more as the bidding war continues. Thank you, Sara. Always good to talk to you.

And that is tonight's QUEST MEANS BUSINESS. I'm Richard Quest in London. Whatever you're up to in the hours ahead, I hope it's profitable. Back to

Bilbao which is a "World of Wonder."

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:46:04]

(QUEST'S WORLD OF WONDER)

END