In short
HD in HD Podcast Episode Summary
Episode Title
How Adversity Made Him Unstoppable | Barry Diller Podcast Description In this episode, Henrique Dubugras interviews Barry Diller, a legendary figure in Hollywood known for his transformation of Paramount Pictures, the founding of Fox Broadcasting Company, and the establishment of IAC. Diller shares his journey from a wayward youth to a powerhouse in the entertainment industry, highlighting how adversity shaped his instincts and career trajectory.
---
Key Themes and Topics Discussed
- Barry Diller's Early Life
- Diller began as a "wayward kid" with no clear ambitions.
- His first significant risk was producing original TV movies, which was unconventional at the time.
- Trusting Instincts and Defying Convention
- Diller emphasizes the importance of trusting one’s instincts in making pivotal career decisions.
- His ability to defy conventions led to groundbreaking changes in the television and film industries.
- Impact of Adversity
- Adversity as Training Ground: Diller argues that adversity is crucial for developing instincts and capabilities.
- Personal challenges shaped Diller's outlook, enabling him to turn perceived weaknesses into strengths.
- Launching Fox Broadcasting
- Diller's venture into Fox Broadcasting came at a time when three dominant networks controlled the market.
- He successfully introduced a fourth network by organizing independent broadcasters who were not affiliated with the existing networks.
- Critique of Hollywood Trends
- Diller critiques the prevalence of sequels in Hollywood, suggesting they have diminished the creative edge of the industry.
- He reflects on the change in filmmaking, noting the shift from material-driven decisions to element-driven ones.
- Visionary Business Moves
- Diller discusses the founding of IAC and its innovative approach, which involved acquiring companies and then spinning them off into independent entities.
- He emphasizes that success often comes from serendipity and being prepared to act on opportunities when they arise.
- Reflections on Risk and Management
- Diller shares insights into managing various businesses and dealing with the complexities of a conglomerate.
- He also discusses his philosophy on risk-taking, noting that while he is not as extreme a risk-taker as others, he has developed a comfort with calculated risks over his career.
- E-Commerce and Interactive Experiences
- Diller was an early proponent of the potential of interactive screens, recognizing their future application beyond storytelling.
- He transitioned into e-commerce and established successful businesses like Expedia, emphasizing innovative approaches to traditional industries.
---
Key Takeaways
- Adversity Shapes Success: Embracing challenges can uncover hidden strengths and instincts that are vital for personal and professional growth.
- Trust Your Instincts: Listening to one's gut feeling can lead to groundbreaking decisions that defy conventional wisdom.
- Innovation Over Tradition: Moving beyond established norms, especially in creative industries, can lead to significant breakthroughs.
- Value of Timing and Circumstance: Success is often a confluence of preparation, opportunity, and timing rather than just skill or ambition.
- Critique of Current Trends: Diller's insights suggest that the film industry has lost its creative edge due to an overreliance on sequels and established franchises.
---
Conclusion Barry Diller's journey exemplifies how instincts, resilience, and a willingness to take risks can lead to transformative achievements in any industry. His reflections provide valuable lessons on the importance of innovation, the impact of adversity, and the necessity to challenge the status quo in pursuit of success.
For more information and insights, visit [Brex](https://www.brex.com/?ref_code=bmk_audio_HDinHD) or follow Henrique Dubugras on [Twitter](https://x.com/hdubugras).
Written by AI. May contain mistakes. Listen to the episode to check what was said.
Transcript
Automatic transcript. May contain errors.0:00It's an irrational exuberance that causes movies to be made at such extraordinary amounts of money. This week, we have legendary executive Barry Diller, the first to cross from television into movies and later the visionary behind some of the biggest shifts in entertainment. Do you think it was a better business back then? I think it was creatively much better. I can't bear sequels of these movies that run too long for no good reason. An inexplicable narrative. People in the movie business look down on the people from television as an inferior class of people. And I was the first person from television to go into the movie business, basically because Charlie couldn't care less what anybody else thought.
0:39He went on to pioneer cable in the internet age, building IAC, Expedia, and ventures that transformed how we shop, travel, and experience media. In the middle of its closing, 9-11 came and travel stopped completely. People around me said, well, you can't buy this thing. There is no travel. And somebody in the room said, well, if there's life, there's travel. And I said, well, that's it. And we closed the deal. and of course travel came back, et cetera, et cetera. And the rest is history? Yeah, yeah, yeah. I'm Enrique Dubugras, and welcome to HD in HD. This episode is brought to you by Brex, a brand I'm proud to have co-founded and one that's shaped by the same journey many of you are on.
1:16Brex has everything startups and fast-growing companies need to make every dollar count, from modern corporate cards, banking, and treasury, to accounting, automation, travel, and expenses. Over 25 ,000 companies, including DoorDash, Scale AI, and Anthropic, spend smarter using Brex. Well, Barry, first, thank you so much for doing this. I really appreciate it. Happy to do it. I was trying to remember the first time we met. And I think the first time I met you, you probably don't remember. Who knows? I remember so little. Yeah, but it was once at the Met Gala. I think it was the Met Gala. Exactly.
1:53Exactly. And I said that I, you know, I knew Alex, you know, your stepson as, and you said, no, my stepson, my son, you know, I treat him like family. Yes, yes, yes. Very much so. I remember that was a little, that was interesting to me and that, you know, kind of after reading the book and seeing how close you are with your family, that's been very inspiring. So tell me, your dad, you know, from the book, he seemed like he did, he was pretty successful building his business, quote unquote. So what do you think you learned from him business-wise? I don't know that I actually learned. I mean, well, there is one thing that I, my father was relatively uncommunicative and somewhat stoic.
2:36And my parents kind of lived an independent life pretty much from each other. But the one thing I got from my father was how honest he was. He was a deeply honest person. He actually didn't take much joy in anything. And I never could figure out what he actually did. I mean, I know what he did because they built all this stuff in LA and in the surrounding area of LA. But what I mostly got from him was his absolute honesty. And was that in business in the sense of like... It was in everything. It was just his nature. Interesting. And you think you're clearly like that too. I hope so. And then you grew up, you know, it was very interesting reading where you were kind of in the middle of Hollywood when Hollywood is being formed, I guess, right?
3:37That's not that early. I'm not that old. Well, definitely much smaller than it is today. In the late 50s, early 60s is when my career life began. And I was very lucky that the people who really founded it, a few of them were still around. And I got to know them. Who were the founders in your view? Well, the founders were the Warner family, founded Warner Brothers. The Zuckers, who founded Paramount, which was actually the first company. Paramount was the first actual studio. The Lemleys at Universal. They were all, there were these kind of Fox, William Fox, and Zanuck. There were like five guys, five mostly Jews from Eastern Europe, not Germany.
4:31And they really were the founders. And were they like kind of like business people? They're more creative? No, no, no. They were the whole equation in their head. They knew they started, most of them, with very primitive Nickelodeon theaters where you, you know, see a few frames pass. Motion pictures, like people saw a train on a film strip, which scared them to death because no one had ever seen that before. So the originators were so, it was so primitive. They started in the theater business. And then they realized that they had all these seats. Unless somebody figured out stuff to make for them, these seats would remain empty.
5:17So they got into the production business. And then they, you wouldn't call them creative souls. And yet they were enormously actually creative in the decisions they made of what to produce and make resonated with the world, which is quite remarkable. And did you look up to them when you were kind of like in your teens? Well, I love the history of it because the history was so dramatic as to how the whole thing formed and fascinated me. And I wanted to participate in it. But by the time I came along, they were really gone. I mean, they were just a few of them. Daryl Zanuck was still dodderingly active, but mostly so that he could get his various mistresses work so that they would be mistresses to him and not overly burden him.
6:11What was one story that you remember from the time that fascinated you? Well, the story that, I mean, the story of, there's a wonderful book called, not a kingdom, something of our own, written by Neil Gabler about these founding people. and each of their, there's not one little story. There's the entire, really, history of an industry that got made up by a very few people. Yeah, no, it's... So that fascinated me. I will go on to read that one because I'm very interested in history of these industries. It's their own. Anyway, it's Neil Gabler. And then when you're going through your teenage years, were you already, you weren't thinking that you wanted a career in movies?
7:03or are you already thinking that? No, the only thing, I mean, I was basically hibernating. I had not much of an idea in my head for a whole lot of reasons. And I was kind of just floating around. But the only, and I thought, you know, I'm now 19, 20. I don't want to go to university. And I thought, well, I got to do something. And the only thing, it wasn't like, oh, I've got to go to work because I didn't have that pressure. But the only thing that intrigued me was the entertainment business. And so I thought, I'm 19 then, and I'm thinking no one's going to pay any attention to me. but I thought I could go to William Morris Agency, this theatrical agency that had been in business for 70 years and had the entire history of the entertainment business under its building walls.
7:59I thought, oh, I could go there and learn. And that's what I did. Would you consider yourself ambitious at that time? No. No. Absolutely not. Was that something that kind of grown into you? It was such a shock to everyone around me, particularly my family, who thought I'd never work and didn't really care much. And I absolutely had no functioning ambition. I was not, like, stirring. I was becalmed. And my family had a lot of resources, so I didn't have to do anything. And I was kind of living this kind of nocturnal, little wayward kid life. But once I started in the mailroom, William Morris, and I had known that I was so interested in entertainment, but I was so fascinated by it that it galvanized me.
8:55And suddenly I realized, you know what? There's a motor stirring in there. And I've never been able to shut it off since then. It's so interesting because, you know, you were, when you became the CEO of Paramount at 32, was it? Yes. Which at the time, there's not a lot of, is there anyone else that was like at that age, you know? No, not even close. Which it's kind of fascinating to me that like, how is it that it was like no ambition, you know, before and then out of the blue was the youngest, you know, to kind of do this. Well, I was actually before that, that's a 32, but at 26, it was 26. I was the youngest vice president of ABC, television network, in the history of television.
9:41So I was very kind of lucky, whatever, circumstantial, serendipitously young and ridiculously successful at a ridiculously young age. Where did this come from? What do you mean? Why? Most things come, at least my experience, from serendipity. I mean, now, I think everybody gets a certain amount of it. I've gotten a tremendous amount of serendipity of situations that were unpredictable. You could have never predicted that, for instance, my first job at ABC, I accepted to become the assistant to the middle-level executive at ABC. And the day I agreed to do that, I'm 22 or 23, just 23. The day that I said, yes, I'll become your assistant, they fired the czar of all of ABC's programming.
10:49They reached out and they picked my middle-level guy to be the head of programming and the head of the network. and I became his assistant. Oh, wow. And so where do you go write that one down? Where do you predict that? Now, did I do something with it? Yeah, but I have so many of those markers that you can only say that serendipity had an enormous amount to do with it. But what do you think, you know, obviously, you got a lot of shots on goal, but you scored a lot of them as well. What do you think you were really good at already at that age? at seducing people. Interesting. Was it conscious or unconscious?
11:29No, it was definitely not. I mean, it was not like, oh, I know how to do this. Let me turn this trick. It just was, I knew how to please people. All sorts of reasons in earlier times of mine that were necessary for me to please people, to get out of worries that I had. And I think this is generally true that the difficulties that you have, this can be true, that all the things that made your life difficult, age four, six, 10, 12, 14, 16, whatever those are, all those things actually become little power levers for eventual abilities to succeed. And they were not certainly fun to go through. Most adversity is not.
12:23But the things that you automatically develop, aside from your own biology, which is its own cookery, the things that you develop out of adversity become your kind of unique powers. And I had a lot of adversity. So I had a lot of unique powers. Now you can take adversity and let it destroy you. But if your biology is strong, the opposite can happen. It becomes like your biggest weaknesses are your biggest superpowers as well. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So if you had to like, you know, you probably mentored people over the years. I hate that word. It's too official. Why do you hate it? Because it's too official.
13:05It's to the whole mentoring thing, which gets bureaucratic and, you know, when people choose each other off because it's kind of imposed on them. I just resist such stuff. But a lot of people have been in my orbit. I don't know that I've, quote, mentored anyone. So maybe let's pick that. So from people in your orbit, what do you think they would have learned from you about how to please people or seduce people? No, I don't think you get that. I mean, I don't think you get that.
13:44You just talked about these tools that you develop out of adversity. Yeah. You can't teach that to anyone. And there's no teaching there. The, the, the, the going up, having people in your orbit means essentially they are observers and reactors and they kind of learn from being in, it's almost osmosis. They learn from being in your environment. And if they're malleable enough, young enough to be impressionable, which I think is the best way to develop people is before they've had experience. and they're in your environment and they see the processes you use, not necessarily your, quote, native abilities, but just your way of functioning, allows them to develop their way of functioning best.
14:46Which is why the concept, the little word bubble that you have above your head of a mentoring is to me so empty. Yeah, because it's... It seems like instructive. Yeah. And I don't really believe that instruction... Again, I hated school, so I don't like being instructed. Yeah, no, I get it. Yeah, yeah, yeah. It's... Pulling stuff. Makes sense. So let's talk a little bit about the business, you know, of... Let's start with the network back then. Give us... for those of us who weren't there, what was the business of cable back then? And like, what was your exact? Well, first of all, back then, this is the 60s and 70s.
15:28There were three, there were only three networks. There was no cable. I mean, cable was basically just used to pull signals so that you could get a better picture if mountains or other obstructions didn't give it to you because everything was over the air and kind of line of sight. But you only had three television networks controlled in the United States, 100 % of the viewing. So today, a successful audience is 5, 7, 9 million. Then it was 30 million because you were really dividing by 100 million households by three. So the three networks were enormously powerful. They were the only mass engines of communications other than movie theaters and local newspapers.
16:15Almost all newspapers were local. Yeah. And then did you understand what the business was of cable network back then? Cable. Don't use the word cable. There was no such things. Yes, network. They were called broadcast networks. Broadcast networks. Yes. Did you understand the business of the broadcast networks back then? Of course, it was all based on 100 % revenue came from advertising. It did not come from consumers. It came from advertisers. Television was, quote, free to consumers. And then your job was, after being an assistant, you got promoted to be the picker, right, of the movie of the week?
16:49Is that kind of the best way to do it? Well, most things on television then were hour or half hour series where everything was basically in stasis, meaning people didn't get old. I mean, they got old physically, but their roles were the same in playing characters in television series. And I thought, well, I wasn't very much interested in that, but I was interested in making original movies for television, which hadn't ever happened. Nobody did that. And so we invented this concept called Movie of the Week, where we made the first year 25 original movies. And the next year we got up to 40 or 50.
17:36And by the third year, we were making 75 movies a year. and why do you think you were good at doing that without having done that ever how did you learn how to make go ask harry i mean like anything again the whole aspects of the entertainment business every part of it interested me and but i never really thought i didn't think that i was equipped to make editorial decisions because I'd never done it before. But the thing is, it's how you get experience. You teeth on something and you essentially develop some sort of expertise in your fingertips. And I had sold at the age of 24, 24 and a half or something, I sold this idea that we wanted to make these movies.
18:33Everyone thought they would fail at ABC. And so nobody really wanted to be around it. And so they let me do it because they thought it would fail. And I surprised them. But to answer the question, and I think this is great. I think if you're a manager of business, the best way to learn how to be a manager is, of course, to start something where you're essentially the first employee. And you're going to hire people to help you get stuff done. But in doing so, you essentially learn each role as you progress to build an organization. Because when you're starting something with a blank piece of paper, that's the only way you can do it.
19:21You don't go out and hire 12 people the first hour of the first day. I had to hire people to read scripts, to write scripts, to then perform all the functions of getting this stuff done. So in 12, 18 months, I think probably initially we were a couple of hundred people. But every role in that organization I developed. So I got to know how it worked and how to make it work. And so it taught me the individual role. But again, by process, it taught me how to be a manager because there was nobody, there was no other way for me to learn it. No one was teaching you how to be a man. No. I mean, to me, you know, listen, B schools, MBA programs have a value of some kind, although I doubt it.
20:24at least for me and for my observations of others, I think it's far better than that kind of learning process to be dropped into a situation where you actually have to do things that teach you by the things you're doing. It was basically a startup within. It was a complete startup, yes, from zero. Yeah, and you had to learn how to do everything, and if you failed, it was on you, and if you succeeded, you also got there. Yeah, and again, the only reason a kid got to do it, and I think this is probably true of lots of other situations, is because no one else wanted it because I thought it would fail.
21:11Yeah. No one of the other more experienced people were interested in it. Of course, because they all saw the risks. I only saw the opportunity. And was there anything structural that made it work as well? Or just you made great movies, therefore it worked? It's like so many things, time and circumstance. I am the beneficiary of a time when free network programming was very constricted and there wasn't much variety in it. And so as a counter programmer, which I love and have been for life a counter programmer, meaning programming where others aren't, countering what is obvious with something that's not obvious, that the moment gave that to me.
22:01I didn't invent that. I was just the beneficiary of circumstance and timing. Yeah, that was the opportunity that was available at that moment in time for you. That moment, I was in a particular place with a particular set of circumstances. I didn't create those circumstances. I had an idea, a somewhat original idea, I guess. But the circumstances that allowed me to succeed were not of my making. They were structural. Do you think that in the end, you developed taste from this experience? Well, this is an interesting thing, taste. Yes. I don't know. I'd use the better word. Better word. I use a word that I think is better, which is instinct.
22:42When you're making decisions in the world of creating things product, it's an editorial process. You're saying, I will do this, I won't do that. Just take it as when we're making 25 movies, it's, all right, what one movie do you make as against not make, meaning this idea versus that idea. So in a way, it's a bit binary. And if you are lucky enough that your mainstream instincts, if you keep them clean, and that your mainstream instincts are consistent with the general population or large subsets of that general population, Out of that process, if you repeat it enough, whether or not it eventuates into better taste or less better, I don't think taste is the word.
23:45It's instinct and the ability to keep your instincts fresh and clean so that you can make those decisions, those editorial decisions. Got it. So it's something you think comes out of experience and pattern recognition. And also, if it somewhat aligns with the general population, then you make a hit. It's just, it's if you're, again, lucky enough or whatever, if you're, it's in, there's no research that can ever tell you the tale. there's no facts that benefit you or that you can refer to that will allow you to make better decisions it's all instinctive so if you've got a set of basic instincts that resonate with the general public things will work out better for you who did you look up to at that moment in time like who were you're kind of like getting inspired from is it your boss is it no not particularly i mostly saw flaws but uh i'm lucky i don't have any envy so uh jealousy of so first thing i would think of is where do i look up to did i look up to people i mean people who were i would say i looked up to people who were confident interesting because i didn't have any you didn't have any no wow that's surprising to hear given how much you have right now.
25:14I don't know how much I have now, but whatever. I have experience in whatever. God knows age and whatever. But yeah, I think that the people that I went, wow, are people who I saw had native confidence. Was Charlie one of those? Charlie Bluedorn? Yeah. Oh my God, Charlie Bluedorn was such a huge combustible character. He was like a, when I met Charlie Bluedorn and I was 25, he was not old. He was maybe 30, no, 40, I guess. And this is in the 60s. And when I met him, this was a time in the United States and actually probably the world, And I say it's leaded, certainly, where conglomerates had been functioning for maybe a decade or so, which was multi-business businesses.
26:15And Bluedorn built from scratch probably the largest conglomerate of its time, which owned the conglomerates in this case of kind of similar, certainly not to the way Berkshire built its multi-business business that covers so much ground. But I think Gulf and Western, which was this company, maybe 30 or 40 individual companies from making bumpers for cars to sugar refinery, sugar plantations to industrial, highly sophisticated. I mean, in other words, just endless numbers of companies under one roof, assembled by this brilliant Austrian-American, Austrian immigrant to America at the age of teens, I guess.
27:22Just an incredible industrialist. And why were conglomerates a thing, and why do you think they're not a thing anymore? Well, because they're, you know, I don't know what conditions produced them. I think, again, it was just the energy of a few individuals. There were only four or five big conglomerates, multi-business businesses. What produced them was the stock market because what happened with Gulf and Western, and I think with several others, is they made acquisitions because their paper value kept accelerating. So they would buy a company for stock. The market would like that, pushing their stock price higher.
28:09They'd use those securities to buy more. The dilution was gigantic. But the rising price was also gigantic as this spinning thing kept going. So they were the rage until it became clear they were all unmanageable. You couldn't manage that many enterprises efficiently. And so the flywheel really turned against them. And they went out, I don't know, probably in the 80s. That's when it started going. I think they got picked apart by private equity. And I was going to say private equity was another, let's call it a better model. But Charlie, who started all this, was the person who got me to come to Paramount.
29:00and he just had to be in the room. There was no one I'd ever known. He would buy or sell anything. He walked into this room before either of us walked out of the room. Something would be bought or sold. He was that voracious. His appetite was gigantic. What did you learn from him? Oh, my God. I don't know. I learned it. I don't know. Again, I don't know that you learn, or at least I didn't learn any particular how could I learn from Charlie was a genius I watched him and observed him he took the sugar market and I'm pretty sure this is true this is somewhere in the late 70s early 80s from 6 or 7 cents to 62 cents and on the 62nd cent he sold it and drove it down back to six cents.
29:59I made a ton of money. He made more money than you could ever even conceive of in one year, yeah. Because he dominated. Gulf and Western owned a company called South Puerto Rican Sugar, which owned basically the sugar production of the Dominican Republic. And what do you think? He was just a very good dealmaker? Was that kind of the thing? It's not that he was in... He was in insatiable everything. So, yes, he could... He also... He had a first-rate brain. He could add boxcar numbers and divide them in his head. So he had that ability. But he also had, as I say, this voracious appetite and energy.
30:43And there was nothing that he saw in front of him that he didn't want. just ambitions with extreme yes and he died he was 56 56 when he died so he was he died quite young yeah very much so and would the companies have like a shared culture or no no absolutely not no every company was it's kind of they were all kind of yes they were again they weren't really uh optimally managed they weren't efficient let's call it it wasn't kind of let's cut the costs and you know, make, because we operate a lot of things, we can make things, you know, simpler on a dollar averaging basis. But they were opportunistic.
31:28I mean, the range of companies is just so incredibly diverse. But he loved, he bought Paramount out of almost bankruptcy. and by his just wily way of being able, the tale of how we acquired each of these companies was like a great opera buffet drama, every one of them. So, but all of them were in situations that weren't, like he'd never overpaid for stuff, I guess. Never. Makes sense. It was always like a good thing. No, no, no, no, no, no, never. Book value. Book value. Oh, wow. Oh, no, no. He was, Charlie was, or some book that I used to see him rifle through, which was, you know, this is way before, obviously, any digital data.
32:14There was some book that I think, book, that in it had every company and endless little tables in it that you could derive book value from. And any time a company would just flip to it and you would say, this is the book value, how much under it can I buy the thing for? Oh, wow. So it was very much the, like, buy it at a cigar bar. Yeah, yeah, in a way.
33:04on your cash brex was designed to make every dollar count so you can focus on what really matters building your dream so whether you're just getting started or you're ready to take on the next big thing brex has your back check it out and see why the world's most innovative startups like anthropic scale ai and robin hood trust brex when he picked you to do paramount like what was you were like now running a successful movie. I was at ABC. At ABC. Yeah, yeah. I was definitely, we had been successful making not only movies, but then we started the novel for television, which became the miniseries.
Read the full transcript
33:44So yeah, we were really successful then. So when he hired you, you were a little bit more of a known quality or not? Not even? Well, in that, yeah, no, because we were very successful, I was definitely known, but I certainly, this is 1974 so long ago anyway uh this was a period when uh nobody in television had ever been allowed to be in the movie business people in the movie business looked down on the people from television as an inferior class of people and i was the first person from television to go into the movie business basically because charlie couldn't care less what anybody else thought and he thought I'd be good at it.
34:34And you think if you were in his shoes, you would have done the same thing or no? Picking myself? Yeah. Unlikely. Unlikely? Yeah. Why? Well, just because, I mean, I wouldn't... I don't know that I'd have the guts that Charlie had to do things in the way Charlie did them. I mean, I don't know. Maybe I would have. No idea. And then when you go into Paramount, tell me a little bit about like how, what was success look like? Was it just like making great movies? Was that what drove the business? Well, again, this is before, Paramount was very little in, most movie companies weren't. Paramount wasn't much in the television business.
35:12Making television shows, Paramount was a movie company. Yeah. Although, because I came from television, after a few years, we started making television shows and we ended up making five of the top 10 television shows. It was a movie company, and the work was that you develop movies, and they were either successful or not successful. And I had not liked the way movies had been made by these major movie companies, because I thought they were all packaging things from known elements that were big stars and people had leverage. And I thought it was antithetical to a real development process, which is you develop material based upon scripts or ideas, and then you got to the point where you thought, oh, this is really good script.
36:05Then you choose all the other elements to put it together rather than the way movie businesses have been organized, which was backwards, which was taking the elements and then choosing the material, which I didn't like as a process. And that took two years. We failed miserably for a couple of years until we got it together. How many years until it worked? So for two years, we were between fifth and sixth of the success of Movie of Comics, meaning we were a failure. And then we got it together, figured out this flywheel that I was describing earlier. and I think the first big smash movie was Saturday Night Fever.
36:49Oh, yeah. It's kind of a classic film. And after that, we went from last place to first place and we held it for the next seven or eight years. The movie business was predominantly put together with elements rather than material and I flipped it to make it material rather than elements. Got it. Got it. So start with the script and the story. Yeah, yeah, yeah. And how was producing a movie back then different than now in terms of like... Well, listen, things cost X and now they cost Y and it's not simply inflation. It's just... It's kind of... I don't even know. It's an irrational exuberance, let's call it, that causes movies to be made at such extraordinary amounts of money, mostly to be wasted, just my point of view.
37:48Anyway, you're still making something that is seen at a length of 110 to 140 minutes or so. And so the basics are all the same. What is different now, then there was no such thing as a sequel. And it was like, I can't even think of, we never made a sequel to anything. And there were really not blockbuster movies up until the 70s and 80s with Jaws actually was the first one. So the stakes were different. Now, it's much more a merchandising business than it was then. And it still can happen today, but the whole emphasis today on, for instance, the Marvel Universe, making movies that are sequels to successful movies, is essentially the bread and butter of movies today, rather than making original films.
39:03Why do you think, when you say about merchandising, what do you mean by that exactly? How does the business change in terms of the business model? The business has changed because now the investments are so much higher. Meaning, if you take one of these sequels, whether it's the Star Wars, Star Trek, all these franchises, Fast and Furious, etc. They cost a couple of hundred million dollars to make, and you're going to make a movie for a couple hundred million, you're going to spend a hundred million or more on marketing it and merchandising it. So they become their own self-fulfilling elephants that are conceived that they have to be successful or else they'll break the bank.
39:50whereas in the alternative way movies were made before you would never really be risking an individual movie very rarely would you have a movie that was very expensive other than the quote average of what a movie would cost what was the average back then well i mean we're dealing again in let's see seven 1970s 80s 90s dollars 30 million 40 million something like that oh wow So big difference, including market, including everything. Oh, huge. Yes. Differences are huge. Yeah. Wow. Do you think it was a better business back then? Better business. I think it was creatively much better. I can't bear sequels of these movies that run too long and have five acts, five endings for no good reason and inexplicable narrative.
40:43Yeah. So yeah, I think creatively was better. I mean, the numbers are now so big that if you have a series of franchise movies that succeed, you're probably making inflation adjusted. You're probably making much more today than you were. But the creative output is so much less. Makes sense. So potentially better business, but worse quality of movies. I think so. and you know i think you you from paramount you know obviously crushed it and was that the point in time of your career that you felt that like that was like the you know in terms of like recognition things like was that the the top of it given that industry or no later on was like i've had a lot of tops yeah i can't i can't help it yeah i mean i could say i could catch a few But in fact, I've just been whatever enough that in each of these decades, I've had projects that have had relevance.
41:52So, you know, at each point, you could say, you know, there was a pretty impressive recognition and whatever. because I was the first. I was the first. I did a lot of things that hadn't been done before and were discounted and presumed they would fail. And so when they didn't, because they had not been done before, they had been out of fashion or whatever, I kind of got supercharged recognition from them, from each of them. And when you went to Fox, was there was that like a similar hey what i did a paramount doing at fox or you had to reinvent it again from no at fox the principal thing we look we brought the same flywheel about making movies that's never changed would never change for me i've had run three movie companies so i've had the similar playbook but what we did at fox at the again at the time there were three television networks that had 100 of the viewing of everybody in the u.s and i thought there should be a fourth And so we started Box Broadcasting, which was also a startup from a blank piece of paper, as an alternative to these three networks.
43:16And it took about a year and a half to pull that through. And then we became actually the most watched network. What did it take to launch a new network back then? You mean dollars? Just what happened? How would you even do that? back then it wasn't easy we the first difficulty was actually uh getting enough individual broadcasters in the united states that were not affiliated with the three networks which were very few they were all actually ultra high frequency they weren't so maybe explain that a little bit more like what do you mean who were the broadcasters how what was the relationship with the networks Broadcasting before there's cable, the only way you could receive a television or anything is through the air, through broadcasting it on frequencies.
44:15First radio frequencies, and then spectrum was added for television frequencies. And if you had a local television station, you borrowed that frequency, didn't pay for, federal government licensed you to operate it, quote, in the public interest. And then you could offer programming and advertising. And there were only enough stations, really, to supply three television networks and then some straggling stuff. And we organized the stragglers and started new broadcasting stations to create a fourth service that would cover the United States. And that was a very difficult thing. And was it profitable from the beginning?
45:04No, no, no. You lost money for a long time. Not a long time, shockingly, actually. Now, this is 86, 85-6. I think we broke even after investing about$130 or$40 million in the 85th week, which was pretty good. How does one raise that money? You'd have to have, I know - No, no, no.
45:35It was general debt that we raised, actually. Against what? Yes, against Fox Company, which was, again, in the movie business and television business. So that was very profitable. Yeah, it was profitable enough. And it didn't take that much capital. It just took a lot of sweat. To get all the licenses. To get it all together and start the program, you know, wheel going and all that investment you had. Time and sweat. And you worked a lot with Rupert back then, right? I did. Yes. What do you think was his kind of, what he was really good at? Oh, Rupert's the greatest gambler I know. Oh, really?
46:18Yeah. Industrial. Listen, when you think Rupert Murdoch starts one little newspaper in Adelaide in Australia, and went on to conquer the media business in Australia, then goes to Britain and does the same thing, and then comes to the U.S. and does the same thing on three different continents. That's pretty good. Kind of unheard of, right? Of people coming from outside the U.S. and winning. I mean, no one ever has or will. Rupert's just a... He bets against the establishment to establish what he wants to do, usually against the establishment wishes, and he pulls it off. How do you think he pulls it off?
47:05just fights harder than everyone? Well, when you say it's a combination of an enormous number of talents, the biggest talent of which is his understanding of risk and how he will, quote, take risk. That's, to me, the most impressive part. And is it that he understands risk that looks like risk for most people, but he actually sees that it's actually not that risky? Is that maybe how you say it? No, no, no. I don't think it's that. I think he's willing to take on risk at greater levels than anyone else, and to do it in an unprotected way. He does not edge his risk. But then why do you think he hasn't blown up, I guess?
47:52Because if you do that for long enough... Well, he did actually come very close, because price to Rupert was not really an issue for or anything he wanted to acquire. It wasn't like Charlie. It was the opposite. Yeah. And so he bought actually a thing called TV Guide for overpaid by billions of dollars. And then in the late 80s, I guess, the markets went against him. And the debt was too large. He couldn't service the debt, had to refinance and do all these things, excuse me, that saved him. But he came very close. Interesting. He liked coming close. He liked being close to the edge. Yeah, I think so.
48:42And did you absorb some of that for yourself? I've never been as big a risk taker as Rupert, never will be. But yeah, I got comfortable with risk. Because after that, after Fox and making it hugely successful, that's when you went on your own, right? Yep, yep. And this is part of your story that for me is so fascinating because a lot of people at that time would have either keep doing what they're doing, but you went in like completely, I guess, different. I'd run these movie companies for a long time and I didn't want to repeat myself and I didn't know what I wanted to do, but I got intrigued with using, this is in the 90s.
49:23I got intrigued with using screens for something different than telling stories. Screens could be interactive. I'd only seen a screen being something you projected a story onto a narrative. But I found out there'd be this interactivity that, you know, screens could be used not only just for passive processes, but interactive processes. As we all know today, that's what we do, interact with screens. And I got that idea earlier than most. And that fascinated me, so I followed it. And at this point in time, were you already like, you know, hey, financially done? Do you feel you still needed to make more money?
50:06I've never ever, I was lucky that money was never a factor for me. So I've always had enough resources. And certainly by the time I left Fox, I never had to work. But I would, I mean, I was, I had plenty of resources. So it wasn't a motivation. I wasn't out to make money. Yeah, but it wasn't a motivator to you to make more money. It was more going out on your own. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I wanted to be independent. I wanted to see, I worked for corporations for 30 years until I was 49 years old. And I thought, I'd really like to see if I could do something on my own, independent of the mother church, of the big company.
50:49And so that was my motivation. one thing that usually you know people describe that happens is that your level of like drive and energy goes down with age it seems for you that you took probably even the hardest part you know like from that end your drive and energy doesn't seem to be getting down like what oh yeah i know i i if i had an explanation for that one so so you i was gonna ask you you weren't at that time you felt you had as much energy as you had when you were like 32 yeah for sure i mean i don't know about my energy, I had, uh, I certainly had as much, I probably had more ambition, more ambition.
51:28I have no idea why, but I think I probably did because, you know, being independent, you work for a company, uh, and you're a corporatist, you get very much used to that life. It's seductive. You have people taking care of everything for you. You're running large enterprises. And there's an ease of life. If you're successful, there's an ease of life and all. Going out on your own, it's like, what crazy person would do that? Why would you do that? It's only out of some ambition. I mean, it certainly isn't like to perpetuate an easy life. And what was the, you know, what was the, I would say, your first kind of hurray on your own?
52:19Like, how did that work? Well, again, it was serendipity. This is 92, 93. And I, it was just this early convergence of televisions and telephones and computers that resulted in this early interactivity. So by the time I kind of got started at this was the beginning of the internet. and uh i had some fluency about how interactivity worked even primitive interactivity so when the internet came along in 95 people normal folk started using the internet i was ready so there was so much opportunity then it was just like what's in front of the field i mean anything started, whether it was a dating service or, you know, e-commerce service or travel service or whatever, you know, all that was there for the doing.
53:30But the first one was the kind of TV home shopping, right? That was kind of - Well, the first one was QVC, which was a television shopping channel, interactive television shopping. And this was this primitive period of convergence. How did that business model work? Well, the business model was that you offered retail goods that you sold on television. And people could buy them at that time by a phone interface system before digital. And it was a very profitable business. And you kept inventory? Oh, yeah. So it was like a retail but sold through the TV, vertically integrated all the way. Yeah, yeah.
54:14Yeah, that was the first, but that was really before the internet. Once the internet came along, I didn't have any interest in television shopping. I had interest in e-commerce. So then you sold it? What did you do with that business? Which one? QVC. Well, we then went on to buy its competitor, the Home Shopping Network, and then we merged QVC and HSN, and that just became one of the businesses. but then we added 60 businesses onto it over a 15-year period. So that was the IAC? Yeah, yeah, yeah. It eventuated into IAC. It eventuated. So I was going to get to IAC because there's not a lot of examples of things like IAC in the world, which were these public companies who built, bought, invested, you know, like did everything.
55:08It's kind of an original business model, which is that it's kind of a conglomerate, anti-conglomerate, because once the businesses that we had bought got up to scale, we would spin them off into independent companies. So we've spun off, I think, 11 companies over this period, public entities from this. We bought and sold many, but we spun many of them off into their own entities. Why did you come up with this business model? Why structure it like this? It made sense to me, meaning it wasn't invented of whole cloth. It was that I got to a point where I said, which I've talked about earlier, conglomerates are hard to manage and not optimally manage once a company got to a certain size.
55:55And I thought, well, when it gets to a certain size, let it be out on its own. And so we just started doing it one after the other and kind of backed into this model. And it was a public the whole time, right? All of them public. Did you like being a public? I like being a public company. Yes, I like public companies. Why? I don't know. I like the, I guess I like the discipline of it. I think it's that. I like the discipline of it. I like the scoring that a public company allows you to have. I'm not in it for wealth creation, though we've created a lot of wealth. But I just like the system. Just the surroundings.
56:38Is there any downside to it in your view? Of course. It's a pain in the ass. I mean, public companies today, and we read today about saying we shouldn't have quarterly reporting, which I think is wise. I think the whole industry of the quarterly reportage and all of the analyst processes that go into it is not very productive. So, I mean, there are the downsides to it, but I still like the form. Do you think that people value IAC properly over the last 20 years? No, no, no. We never get valued properly. Why do you think that's the case? Because of the conglomerate? Because there's a discount. We own other, at IAC, again, we now have 11 publicly traded companies.
57:37So probably 13 of them, 14 of them in their further spinoffs. But because the discount that you get, the market would discount you for a whole series of reasons. a holding company gets a discount to its assets, which is understandable. And then there are, if you operate complicated enterprises that are in different phases of their development, the market will value them, not necessarily for their correct weightage, which eventually you get truly weighted and truly valued. Going to spin them off. But, or, yes, or circumstances are such that they get overvalued, undervalued, et cetera. So like 2000.
58:26Yeah. Yeah. Makes sense. And what, what was, what were the learnings? I guess, like, what was the similarities between the IAC companies? Right? Like you could have, what? None. None. So you could have, you could have done sugar. Well, no, no, no. They were all interactive. So they were all in various forms of e-commerce or media. So they all had that, but they were all different disciplines in it. in the verticals of life. Did you ever have a big miss? An investment miss? Oh, I'm sure. Any that come to mind? No, I wipe it. You wipe it? I wipe the memory clean. You know, let's talk a little bit about Expedia.
59:09Can you tell, you know, I heard a story before, but I'd love to tell you, like what's the story of how you bought Expedia? Which I guess is probably the more successful of all the IAC companies? I don't know. I think the match group, probably dollar for dollar may have been more successful. Yes, I think probably valuations. Anyway, as I say, I had been very interested in anything that was developing as interactivity began. And one of the first areas that could be colonized was travel on an online travel agency. And so Microsoft had started it, but they were going to sell it. And so we bought it.
59:52And it was going to close, I don't know, some 40, 60 days later. And in the middle of its closing, 9-11 came and travel stopped completely. And we had an out clause for changed conditions, which people around me said, well, you can't buy this thing. There is no travel. And somebody in the room said, well, if there's life, there's travel. And I said, well, that's it. And we closed the deal. And, of course, travel came back, et cetera, et cetera. And the rest is history. Yeah, yeah, yeah. What was the single riskiest bet of your career? Oh, I would probably say the first bet, making movies for television.
1:00:31Making movies for television? The rest, I had, if you get really successful, the less people question you. Makes sense. What did you learn about fighting on the Paramount fights when you tried to take it back over? Know when to not make the last bid. Very good. Who's the toughest CEO you've negotiated with? Oh, my God. The toughest, Sumner Redstone. A lot of the very successful people in the business today have worked with you at some point in time. Mike Weisner, Dara, Katzberg. What was it that you saw? What did you see in people? I see at earliest stages with people, I see energy and edge and instinct.
1:01:17and that's all I care about. I don't care about experience. Last one. If you were 20 today, what would you be doing? I have no clue. What would I be doing if I were 20 and I was looking at this incredibly, we're at the beginning of clearly another revolution, maybe the biggest revolution with artificial intelligence. So if I looked at the world, As I look at the world, I see the only thing I would not want to play in this world that is radically changing. I would want to do actually what we're doing, which is play with hard assets that can't be disintermediated like MGM. Makes sense. Makes sense.
1:02:07Barry, this was amazing. Thank you so much for doing this. I'm happy to talk with you, Henry. Thanks to our friends at Atomic Growth for helping with production and distribution. Thank you.
From the publisher
How does someone with zero ambition rise to the top of Hollywood?
Barry Diller started out as a ‘wayward’ kid with no plan, then took his first big risk in television by producing original TV movies, a gamble no one in Hollywood thought would work.
In this episode, he shares how trusting his instincts and defying convention guided his journey from transforming Paramount to launching Fox Broadcasting Company and building IAC, now home to 10 publicly traded companies, leaving a lasting legacy.
We also get into:
• why adversity is the greatest training ground for instinct
• what it took to launch Fox Broadcasting against three dominant networks
• why sequels ruined Hollywood’s creative edge
• spotting screen interactivity before the internet took over
ABOUT US:
We’re proudly sponsored by Brex—a brand I co-founded, now supporting over 30,000 businesses like Anthropic, DoorDash, and Scale AI, helping them make every dollar count.
I’m grateful for their continued support as I bring you all conversations with some of the most exceptional founders of our generation. For more information, please go to: https://www.brex.com/?ref_code=bmk_audio_HDinHD
Connect with us here:
1. Brex- https://x.com/brexHQ
2. Henrique Dubugras- https://x.com/hdubugras
This episode was produced and distributed by our friends at Atomik Growth.
00:00 Intro
02:12 Barry Diller's Early Life
15:12 The ABC Network
25:30 Charles Bluhdorn
33:26 From TV to Paramount
42:34 Fox Broadcasting and Media Ventures
48:53 E-Commerce and Building IAC
59:07 Expedia




