A source familiar with the matter said the revised bid improves on Paramount’s earlier $30 per share all-cash proposal, which valued the company at about $108.4 billion.

The exact terms of the new offer were not disclosed, but analysts expect it could fall between $31 and $34 per share.

Warner Bros shareholders are due to vote on Netflix’s $82.7 billion cash offer, priced at $27.75 per share, on 20 March 2026. Under the terms of that agreement, Netflix has the right to match any superior proposal.

Warner Bros’ board had asked Paramount to submit its “best and final offer” after rejecting a previous enhanced bid. That earlier proposal included covering Netflix’s $2.8 billion termination fee and adding a quarterly 25-cent per share ticking fee from next year to compensate investors for any delay in closing the deal.

The board said on February 10 that the offer still fell short and set a seven-day deadline for a revised bid.

Neither Warner Bros nor Paramount commented, and Netflix did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The case centres on some of the most valuable assets in entertainment, including the Harry Potter and Game of Thrones franchises, as well as the HBO Max streaming platform.

Warner Bros also plans to spin off cable television assets such as CNN and HGTV into a separate company, Discovery Global. The company estimates the spin-off could be worth between $1.33 and $6.86 per share.

Netflix argues its proposal offers shareholders additional upside from the planned separation. Paramount, however, has said the cable spin-off that underpins Netflix’s case is effectively worthless.

Regulators are already reviewing the competing bids, with the U.S. Department of Justice examining whether Netflix’s proposal leads to antitrust concerns, including its claim that it needs Warner Bros to compete with YouTube, the most-watched distributor on American television screens.

As part of that review, officials are also looking at whether Netflix engaged in anti-competitive practices.

Paramount says it has secured foreign investment clearance in Germany and is in discussions with regulators in the United States, the European Union and the United Kingdom. The company maintains it has a clearer path to approval than Netflix.

Lawmakers in Washington have also spoken. Some Democratic senators warned that a Paramount deal would give the Ellison family control over CNN and CBS and could concentrate too much power over what Americans watch on television.

Others said either transaction could reduce consumer choice and harm creative workers.

For Netflix, a merger with HBO Max would create the largest global streaming platform, with roughly half a billion subscribers.

Co-chief executive Ted Sarandos has said the combination would be better for Hollywood because it would avoid job cuts in an industry already under stress from fewer productions and uneven box office returns.

He has also said consumers could benefit from lower prices through bundled offerings.

Paramount’s bid is backed by Larry Ellison’s financial support and ties to Oracle. Netflix, by contrast, has pointed to its strong cash reserves and the flexibility to raise its offer if necessary.

Investors such as Ancora Capital have accumulated a roughly $200 million stake in Warner Bros and are urging the board to engage more seriously with Paramount.

The activist investor warned that if the company refuses to reopen discussions, it will vote against the Netflix deal and hold directors accountable at the annual meeting.

Analysts at MoffettNathanson said earlier that an offer around $34 per share from Paramount would likely end the bidding war and “avoid further debate over Discovery Global’s value.”

Shares of Paramount rose 1.3% to $10.70 in extended trading following news of the revised bid.

The outcome now rests with Warner Bros shareholders. A vote in favour of Netflix would move that deal forward, though it would still face detailed reviews by competition authorities in the United States and Europe.

If Paramount’s higher offer is deemed superior, the board will have to decide whether to change its recommendation.

The tech giant plans to present its case before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, seeking to overturn a jury verdict and subsequent judicial order that found its Play Store operations violated antitrust laws.

In 2020, Epic Games, the developer behind “Fortnite,” filed a lawsuit against Google, alleging that the company monopolised app distribution and in-app payment systems on Android devices. 

A San Francisco jury sided with Epic in 2023, concluding that Google’s techniques unlawfully suppressed competition. Following the verdict, U.S. District Judge James Donato instructed Google to implement measures to enhance competition. 

These measures include permitting users to download alternative app stores through the Play Store and ensuring that Play’s app catalogue is accessible to competitors. The enforcement of this order is currently suspended pending the outcome of Google’s appeal.

Google contends that the trial court committed legal errors that unfairly advantaged Epic Games. The company argues that its Play Store faces strong competition from Apple’s App Store and that the court improperly allowed Epic to assert that Google and Apple do not compete in app distribution and in-app payments. 

Added to this, Google challenges the nationwide scope of the judge’s order, asserting that it oversteps by imposing broad product design mandates.

Epic Games maintains that Google’s activities represent a “years-long strategy to suppress competition among app stores and payment solutions.”

The company says it is committed to ensuring that the jury’s verdict and the court’s injunction are upheld, holding Google accountable for its anti-competitive behaviour.

The case has garnered support for Epic from entities, including Microsoft, the U.S. Department of Justice, and the Federal Trade Commission, all of which have filed briefs backing Epic’s position. A decision from the 9th Circuit is anticipated later this year, with the possibility of further appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Recently, Google appealed a record €4.3 billion fine imposed by the European Union for antitrust violations related to its Android operating system. Google argues that the penalty unjustly punishes its innovation and has requested that the Court of Justice of the European Union overturn the fine.