As streaming continues to take up a bigger piece of the TV viewing pie, it’s often smaller, independent cable networks that get left in the dust. But Hallmark President Darren Abbott is doing everything in his power to make sure the Christmas movie-peddling company isn’t one of them, instead doubling down on expanding its streaming arm.

Last Thursday, Hallmark+ debuted “Paris Is Always a Good Idea,” an exclusive streaming series that stars network staple Lacey Chabert as she reconnects with former flames after a work trip gets redirected by a message from her late mother. It’s one of the streamer’s biggest shows yet — both in production and viewership.

In its opening weekend, the series garnered nearly as many viewers as the streamer’s biggest hits, “When Calls the Heart” and spinoff “Hope Valley: 1874,” which became the streamer’s biggest launch to date and courted over a third of Hallmark+ subscribers. Hallmark would not disclose specific viewing numbers.

Even as Hallmark Channel celebrates its 25th anniversary as a cable network, and remains a popular destination during the holidays with its glut of feel-good Christmas movies, it’s seeing the same kind of drastic ratings decline that all linear TV is facing. “Paris Is Always a Good Idea” marks the boldest step in the media company’s attempt to reposition itself as a must-see streaming destination by competing with bigger-budget streaming projects. The hope is for the show to bring in new subscribers while keeping its existing base happy, especially as Hallmark and Hallmark-adjacent romance content is booming on bigger streamers like Netflix.

“When you get the content right, people will come over,” Abbott told TheWrap. “We know that as we consistently deliver really great content that our subscribers see as high value, it gives them something to look forward to. That’s a big part of our strategy going forward for Hallmark+, as we continue to build that out.”

Hallmark has embraced overseas production for several programming events and Christmas movies set in London and the Alps, but the series, which filmed in both France and Spain, is arguably one of its more ambitious projects when it comes to international production, and is a departure from the quick turnaround sets and shooting time that became a mainstay for cranking out the network’s holiday slate.

Abbott did not share financial figures associated with bringing production to Paris, but he noted the journey came with “production complexity” and “incremental costs.”

“We look at this more of what’s the right story [and] what’s the right way to tell that story authentically,” Abbott said. “You can’t have a series called ‘Paris Is Always a Good Idea’ without shooting it in Paris.”

The new series joins Hallmark+’s lineup of holiday movies as well as several original series exclusive to the streamer, giving its loyal audience what former Universal and Warner Bros. exec Paul Hardart calls a “clear pathway from traditional television to streaming.”

“Hallmark wants to remain a viable destination for [cord-cutters] as they make that transition,” Hardart told TheWrap via email. “By combining signature Hallmark programming, including its Christmas movies, with new streaming series, such as ‘Paris Is Always a Good Idea,’ the company is trying to evolve alongside its audience without abandoning the content and brand identity that built that loyalty in the first place.”

Streaming gains

The debut of “Paris Is Always a Good Idea” comes nearly two years after Hallmark+’s rebrand, which transformed the platform formerly known as Hallmark Movies Now to include an ad-free tier and exclusive shows and movies instead of just a repository for library content. The streamer has “exceeded every benchmark and metric that we’ve put in place” since, Abbott said, although he didn’t provide specific numbers.

Abbott also said Hallmark+ has the second-largest year-over-year growth — at 31% — compared to other niche streamers, which include AcornTV, AMC+, BritBox, PBS Masterpiece, Shudder, Starz, Discovery+ and more — but is still behind MGM+. He did not provide specifics on those numbers.

With Hallmark+ on the rise, Hallmark properties accounted for 0.8% of TV viewing in May, according to Nielsen’s media distributor Gauge. That percentage is elevated during Hallmark’s holiday boost, with December seeing the company’s piece of the pie rise to 1.2%.

In 2024, Hallmark executives shared their confidence that cord-cutters and the network’s audience would follow them into the streaming world. Now, Abbott noted Hallmark+ subscribers are made up both of viewers transitioning over from linear as well as new audiences altogether.

“I’ve been surprised,” he said, noting anecdotal feedback of viewers gathering to watch new releases on Hallmark’s linear channel and then watching them again on Hallmark+.

“We feel really good about the trajectory that this business is on, and as a result of this, it’s allowing us to invest even more into Hallmark+, meaning more exclusive content coming down the road, more unique benefits in our retail network and a more robust member experience across the board,” Abbott said.

The streamer has also embraced bundling plans with Starz that Abbott said are doing “very well” for the company.

As Hallmark aims to keep scaling up, Abbott revealed that the company is in the final stages of a beta test and a full launch of live streaming channels — from a one focus on Christmas to another based on mysteries — which aims to curate a “lean-back” experience akin to Hallmark’s existing linear channels. “There’s a lot of streaming-first consumers and members that love that experience,” Abbott said.

Alongside the Hallmark+ rebrand, the streamer also launched several reality TV titles in 2024, including the Jonathan Bennett-hosted “Finding Mr. Christmas,” in which actors competed to become the leading man in Hallmark’s next Christmas movie.

That unscripted push, however, might be hitting the brakes.

“I’m a big believer in iteration and innovation … and part of innovating successfully is being able to learn from what you’re doing, really zeroing in on the insights, and also acknowledging when things resonate and when they may not,” Abbott said, noting that several titles were “beloved by segments of our audience.”

“Relative to other parts of the service and other genres, you’ll probably see us lean more into scripted series, movies, exclusive content and probably less focus on unscripted moving forward,” he said.

Combatting linear decline

As linear TV continues its downward trend across the board, Abbott said the company sees Hallmark+ as its “growth platform … not only just for our media business, but really for the entire Hallmark enterprise.”

“Let’s be clear: linear cable is on decline. We’re navigating that. Our audience still is committed, and we are certainly committed to programming and delivering a great linear experience,” Abbott said, adding that commitment won’t falter as the company looks for growth elsewhere.

“We are certainly not moving away from linear, but we’re acknowledging that the industry has shifted. Brands that stay true to who they are and remember who their consumer is and what that consumer and audience wants, can have a very successful business in this space,” he said.

Still, the outlook for Hallmark’s linear channels isn’t too bad: the company is home to two of the top five most-watched cable entertainment networks among women 18+ year-to-date, with the Hallmark Channel standing as No. 2 and Hallmark Mystery being No. 4. Additionally, Hallmark Channel’s original series and movies rank as the most-watched programs on entertainment cable this year-to-date among total viewers and women 18+, per internal data from Hallmark.

And, thanks to licensing deals with Netflix and other platforms, Hallmark content is out in the streaming ecosystem in other ways. And while Hallmark+ is the focus, Abbott said the licensing strategy for select content is working well for them.

“It’s a good way for folks that may not watch the Hallmark Channel to sample some of our content, so … where it makes sense from a business standpoint, you’ll probably see us continue to experiment with business models like that,” he said. “It’s certainly part of the overall economics of of this business.”

With Hallmark+ investing in more shows like “Paris Is Always a Good Idea,” Abbott hinted that the company’s production models might shift slightly from the quick turnaround movies it has become known for.

“We can put things on the fast track and we can produce a movie pretty quickly, but … I’m certainly less focused on quantity over quality,” Abbott said. “I want us to be telling the right stories the right way, and sometimes that takes a little bit more time to get it right.”

But that doesn’t mean the Christmas movies will slow down, with the company recognizing the space as one of its unique strengths. Hallmark debuts 100 new original movies each year, and this year more than a third — 34 — are themed around the holidays, up 42% from last year. The number will be finalized when the full holiday slate is announced in September.

“Our fans can’t get enough Christmas movies from us in the fourth quarter,” Abbott said, noting that commercial-free delayed viewing on Hallmark+ has become “a big part of the way our fans view our content.”

What’s ahead

Beyond the bigger 2026 Christmas slate, Abbott teased the company’s third partnership film with the NFL (this time with the Chicago Bears), a collaboration with the Walt Disney Co. and another story in the “Biltmore” film franchise.

Those partnerships are one of two areas Abbott identified for growth. “We’ve got several other ideas that we’re working on behind the scenes that I’m really excited about,” he said. “It’s a way to break through into the cultural conversation, and it dimensionalizes the Hallmark brand in new ways, so that’s going to be a core part of our playbook going forward.”

The other area Abbott pointed to was continuing to differentiate the user and membership experience around Hallmark+, which extends from the streaming platform into benefits on Hallmark retail products.

“A lot of other CPG and retail brands are now getting into the entertainment space — we were doing that 25 years ago. We knew that there was a need for storytelling and content that was grounded in the core DNA of the Hallmark brand: goodness, positivity, care and connection,” Abbott said. “That’s always stood as the enduring foundation of the content that that we’re creating.”

The retail side of the business might help Hallmark as it manages the transition to streaming “in a way that preserves audience loyalty while maximizing the long-term value and profitability of those customers,” Hardart said.

“The challenge going forward is that Hallmark+ will increasingly have to justify itself against a crowded field of streaming services — not only through the strength and distinctiveness of its content, but also through its subscription price and its ability to attract and retain customers while limiting churn,” he added.

In other words, more than just Christmas movies. Like, perhaps, an idyllic TV show set in Paris.

Starz CEO Jeff Hirsch said total subscribers rose in the second quarter despite a price increase taking effect during the period.

Speaking to Wall Street analysts Friday on the company’s quarterly earnings call, Hirsch declined to state a number of subscribers, in keeping with the company’s decision to stop breaking out that metric. The company ended 2025 with 17.6 million subscribers.

Hirsch said it is “very rare” for subscribers to increase at the same time prices rise. “So, there’s real strength of the business on both sides of the revenue equation,” he said.

The most recent increase, to $11.99 a month, took effect in June.

Prior to the call, Starz reported a mixed set of financial results for the second quarter. Revenue edged Wall Street expectations, coming in at $307.9 million, but slipped 4% from its year-ago level of $319.7 million. Net losses widened to $189.4 million, but the company also disclosed a charge of $147.2 million due to the end of its output deal with Universal.

Starz shares, which have more than doubled in 2026 to date, drifted down 2% in pre-market trading. The company completed its separation from Lionsgate, which owned it for nearly a decade, in 2025.

Alison Hoffman, president of domestic networks chief, was asked about the company’s recent deal with Netflix for the first four series in the Power franchise. She said the global deal “creates an opportunity for us. It’s a way for us to introduce the franchise to new audiences, new viewers. and really reinvigorate it.”

She noted that Starz retains exclusive rights to all sequels, prequels and spinoffs to the show. Its recent installments are really driving the business in terms of engagement and first title streaming and subscriber acquisition. So yes, we think it’s a good thing. It is part of our strategy as programming gets mature. We think that’s syndication model actually works for us.”

On a similar note, Hirsch said the exit from the Universal post-pay-1 arrangement is a positive step. He was asked how much of the company’s overall programming was represented by the Universal titles. “We haven’t aired those titles in almost a year and a half because we were working with Universal, who wanted to keep them fresh. There’s absolutely almost zero viewership or engagement tied to those titles.” When they did air, he added, “we were paying, pay-2 prices for library performance. And so we’ve been able to reinvest some of the savings into buying library to actually drive more engagement.”

Engagement in the second quarter, Hirsch added, was the second-highest in Starz history.

Activity in the current third quarter also received mentions during the call. Michael, a billion-dollar movie hit for Lionsgate, will debut next week on Starz. And Fightland, which was released last week, had the second-best debut of any Starz original. The boxing series launched as Power Book III: Raising Kanan was wrapping its fifth and final season with healthy viewership.

Hirsch said Fightland also offers an appealing financial profile. “It’s doing exactly what we designed it to do, which is to serve the audience that we have, lower churn, extend engagement, extend lifetime value at a cost that is much more reasonable than we’ve gotten from the prior parent,” he said, referring to former owner Lionsgate.

Fightland, he said, costs about $2.5 million per episode, making it “cheaper” than the kind of programming the company used to source from Lionsgate Television. “It’s the same amount of content, just much cheaper cost,” Hirsch said.

The Federal Communications Commission on Thursday repealed a 22-year-old law limiting how many local TV stations a company can own, a move that’s likely to shake up the industry and open the door to more M&A activity. 

The cap was first implemented by Congress in 2004 as part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act to prevent monopolization and ensure viewpoint diversity. It limits entities from owning or controlling broadcast television stations that reach more than 39% of U.S. TV households. Going forward, the FCC plans to conduct a case-by-case review, in which it will approve or deny future deals based on whether they meet the agency’s public interest standard, not a specific percentage cap. 

Companies like Nexstar and Sinclair have lobbied for the cap to be raised or eliminated, arguing that their competition is no longer just other stations, but streaming services and tech giants like Amazon and YouTube who do not have to adhere to the same restriction. They maintain that industry consolidation is needed in order to thrive and survive in the current media landscape. 

Critics, however, argue that only Congress has the legal authority to raise or eliminate the cap and that consolidation could lead to newsroom closures, fewer independent voices and higher prices for consumers.

Complicating matters are state attorneys general who have taken a larger role in antitrust enforcement and present a meaningful hurdle. The merger between Nexstar and Tegna, which the FCC had already approved with a waiver that bypassed this cap, is still on hold thanks to a preliminary injunction successfully won by 13 states suing on antitrust grounds. 

“For consolidation, this opens the floodgates on paper. In practice, antitrust is now the binding constraint,” regulatory attorney Braden Perry told TheWrap. “Station groups can get past the FCC, but they still have to get past state AGs, private plaintiffs and possibly the DOJ.”

Here’s a breakdown of everything you need to know about the change in this 22-year-old rule. 

Why did the FCC want to repeal the cap?

Carr has argued that the cap is an outdated rule and that its removal would provide “essential relief for local broadcasters by restoring a healthy counterbalance to the growing leverage of national programmers.”

He also said that increased scale as a result of the move would enable them to “attract the capital and advertising revenue needed to sustain and produce trusted and community-focused news and programming.” 

“I don’t want local broadcast TV to go the way of local newspapers. And yet the risk is real,” he warned. “We should learn from our mistakes with the local newspaper industry, and we should not let the same thing happen to the local broadcast TV industry. Trusted sources of local reporting, broadcast over the public airwaves, are worth protecting and worth fighting for.”

Commissioner Olivia Trusty added that while the move is not a “silver bullet to reverse audience or marketplace trends entirely,” it would improve local broadcasters’ financial stability and bargaining power and provide additional resources to invest in local journalism, emergency coverage, investigative reporting and community programming.

“The Commission simply cannot expect broadcasters to advance localism, competition and diverse viewpoints if the underlying business model is unsustainable,” Trusty said.

What about this case-by-case review?

Analysts note that the change to allow the FCC to review M&A cases against its public interest standard opens up a can of worms.

New Street Research analyst and former FCC chief of staff Blair Levin warned TheWrap that Carr will be able to approve or reject a deal for any reason he wants and that approvals will likely require a “pro-Trump tilt” in news coverage. 

“The Trump Administration has been very successful in shaking down companies by imposing a Trump transaction tax that replaces free markets with the market for Trump’s affection,” Levin said. “Carr is setting up a process – with a vague standard instead of a rule – that allows a similar shakedown for broadcasters.” 

When asked about evaluating future transactions, Carr said the FCC’s case-by-case review would look at the facts and implement conditions if needed to protect localism.

“The future of local broadcast TV has to be localism. If they are just a pass-through, a mouthpiece for the national feed, people can get that through YouTube TV or other channels. So I think if they’re going to continue to exist, they have every market incentive to continue to focus on localism,” Carr said. “We have the right to preempt where you’re supposed to, if you think there’s a better fit, preempt national programming. We’d like to see that trend continue. So we will be focused to make sure that broadcasters continue to focus on localism and not just being dumb pipes for the national feed.” 

What do the local TV owners say about the move? 

The National Association of Broadcasters called the FCC’s move a “generational step toward strengthening local stations and ensuring they can compete in today’s media marketplace.” Meanwhile, Nexstar said it’s a “welcome, necessary and long-overdue recognition of today’s competitive landscape, which is dominated by legacy Big Media and Big Tech.”

“For too long, local broadcasters were handcuffed from reaching the scale they needed to compete on a more level playing field by outdated federal rules that didn’t apply to the largest and most powerful companies like Google’s YouTube, Meta’s Instagram, or Netflix,” Nexstar added. “Modernizing these rules will help ensure broadcasters can continue investing in local journalism and providing the free, trusted news and information that communities across America rely on every day.”

Nexstar and Sinclair executives have also said the move could boost M&A activity in the space. 

The cap was notably a barrier to the pending $6.2 billion Nexstar-Tegna merger, which was granted a waiver from the FCC but is frozen amid an antitrust lawsuit from a group of state attorneys general and DirecTV. Meanwhile, Sinclair has launched a strategic review that includes exploring M&A opportunities.

“Sinclair is well prepared to participate in value creating consolidation,” CEO Chris Ripley said on Wednesday ahead of the vote. “We will remain disciplined in how and when we do so.”

What do opponents of the move say?

On the flip side, Anna Gomez, the lone Democratic commissioner serving in the FCC, argued that repealing the cap violates the law, exceeds the regulator’s authority and “undermines core public interest principles of localism, viewpoint diversity and competition.” 

“A handful of station group giants does not represent the wishes of local broadcasters. They are large national companies that own local stations and increasingly dictate what airs on them without much local input. Trading a squeeze from Big Tech for a squeeze from Big Media does nothing to protect the communities this cap was designed to serve,” she said. “I recognize that broadcasters are facing serious economic pressures, but addressing one pressure point in isolation without looking at the full picture of rules, obligations and relief already on the table risks setting the wrong incentives.”

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) said that Carr is “trying to illegally rewrite the rules to make it easier for billionaires to line their own pockets while jacking up costs and controlling what Americans watch.” 

“After rubber-stamping the Nexstar-Tegna megamerger, this looks like the Trump administration’s latest attempt to roll out the red carpet for more antitrust disasters,” she added.

The American Television Alliance, a lobbying group representing pay TV providers, consumer groups and independent programmers, called the move a “serious setback for American consumers and local communities.”

“By eliminating this safeguard, the FCC has ignored Congressional intent and opened the door to unchecked ‘Big Broadcast’ consolidation that will drive up costs for viewers and reduce local news programming,” the organization added.

What does it mean for local TV station consolidation? 

Companies at or near the 39% ownership limit include Nexstar, Fox, CBS parent Paramount and E.W. Scripps. Other station owners that could benefit from the cap’s repeal include Sinclair and Gray Media. 

“In the short term, it is mildly good for investors in Sinclair and broadcasters wanting to sell to Sinclair,” Levin said. “But everyone knows Carr would approve those deals anyway through the same process he used for Nexstar, so there isn’t any significant change. And as Nexstar shows, states can still raise antitrust issues.”

Longer term, Levin argued that Democrats would be able to use the new rule to stop further consolidation if they win back the White House in 2028 and install a Democratic majority at the FCC.  

“It makes the broadcasters’ license value dependent on the political whims of whoever is in the White House,” he added. “Markets don’t like that.”

What does it mean for the Nexstar-Tegna antitrust litigation?

As it relates to Nexstar’s ongoing lawsuit with a group of state attorneys general and DirecTV, Nexstar CEO Perry Sook said “on balance there could be marginal benefit because it makes the unknown known from a regulatory perspective,” but acknowledged that he didn’t know if it would have a “ton of effect” as the company goes through the legal process.

Levin said the ownership cap repeal would have “no impact” on the Nexstar antitrust lawsuit whatsoever. 

“It might have helped Nexstar if Carr had adopted the order before the litigation so that it could have cited some of the findings,” he said. “But at the end of the day, Carr’s view of the ‘public interest’ does not trump antitrust law.”

How big will Nexstar-Tegna be?

To give you a sense of the scale of these companies without the ownership cap, Nexstar and Tegna combined would have owned 265 television stations in 44 states and the District of Columbia, representing 80% of households.

In order to clear the merger and receive the FCC’s waiver, the combined company agreed to divest six stations within two years of closing.

Will the repeal face a court challenge?

Almost certainly. Following the vote, Carr acknowledged that “everyone is free to litigate” the FCC’s decisions, but he argued that a D.C. Circuit court ruling that found setting the cap at a specific percentage determined “only the starting point from which the Commission was to assess the need for further change.” 

“Folks have litigated FCC media regulation decisions historically. I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s appeals here, and we’ll allow the courts to work through it. But we’ve done our part,” he said. “If it goes to the courts, it goes to the courts, and we’ll litigate it, and we’ll see where it goes.” 

Sook agreed that the FCC is on “very firm legal footing,” but expects a judicial review of the decision. Perry isn’t ruling out the possibility of a successful legal challenge. 

“Challengers have a real case. The strongest argument is that an agency cannot repeal by rule what Congress wrote into law. After Loper Bright, courts will not defer to the FCC’s reading of its own authority,” Perry said. “I put a challenge at better than even on the statutory question. Watch for an early stay motion. If a court stays the repeal, pending deals are back under the old math.”