Resurrecting Value: How Syndication is Powering a New Phase of Streaming Monetization

What was once considered sacrilege in the streaming world—lending out original titles to rival platforms—is quickly becoming a practical tool for monetization.

With subscriber growth slowing and content costs ballooning, studios and streamers alike are revisiting syndication, not as a relic of broadcast television but as a renewed source of value in an increasingly saturated market.

---

From Exclusivity to Co-Visibility

For years, original streaming series were closely guarded assets—bait for new subscribers and symbols of a platform’s cultural clout. But with content spending outpacing returns and fewer new eyeballs to chase, the walled-garden model is starting to show its cracks. Rather than hoarding titles that no longer drive significant engagement, media companies are reviving the time-tested practice of syndication, this time with a streaming veneer.

This revival isn’t simply about pushing content to free ad-supported platforms. It’s about co-exclusivity—granting rival subscription services limited access to previously locked-down originals. In doing so, companies are discovering they can extract incremental revenue and revive dormant shows with minimal additional investment. The result? A clever, if somewhat reluctant, retooling of streaming’s core value proposition. Syndicating older titles is also a tacit admission that many new shows and films are creatively bankrupt—overly derivative, algorithm-driven, and unable to build long-term audience loyalty—making past successes more valuable than ever.

---

The Quiet Emergence of Streamer-to-Streamer Licensing

The playbook was formulated by Warner Bros. Discovery (WBD) when it began licensing removed titles from Max to free streaming services. But now, the more sophisticated strategy is to license content—particularly faded originals—to high-traffic platforms like Netflix, which offers unmatched audience density.

While studios have historically leaned on this model for legacy network shows, some are testing the waters with streaming-native originals. This approach doesn’t just monetize underperforming titles; it potentially boosts engagement on both the lending and receiving platforms. As studios reevaluate what exclusivity is really worth, the allure of visibility and viewership spikes is proving hard to ignore.

---

Discover What Global Streaming Platforms Pay to License Films and Shows

Unlock unparalleled access to detailed market intelligence drawn from financial data and agreements between leading industry players, including distributors, producers, and streaming platforms.

Gain a competitive edge by understanding the real-world distribution rates and terms driving global licensing deals. By leveraging most-favored-nation rates, our data reflects a diverse range of content and distributors, ensuring relevance across multiple availability windows and content tiers.

---

Netflix’s Inevitable Move Toward Outbound Syndication

Long the fortress of streaming self-sufficiency, Netflix is also inching toward syndication—albeit at a glacial pace. While it typically acquires global rights that preclude third-party licensing, a handful of older titles have quietly slipped onto other platforms, primarily free ad-supported channels across platforms like Tubi and Plex.

Even more notable is BoJack Horseman, one of Netflix’s earliest and most acclaimed originals. Though it premiered in 2014, syndication rights were retained by producer Tornante Company and its distribution partner, Debmar-Mercury (Lionsgate). In 2018, rerun rights were shopped to cable buyers—an unusual but instructive move that reflected the more flexible deal structures of Netflix’s early originals before it began enforcing airtight global rights deals.

These licensing arrangements weren’t driven by Netflix but by outside rights holders with the foresight to preserve off-network value. As a result, BoJack serves as a case study of how syndication can coexist with streaming, especially when backend rights are thoughtfully structured. While Netflix may not have orchestrated these deals, they offer a preview of what’s possible if the company begins to monetize its dormant catalog more directly.

---

The Turn Toward Third-Party Licensing

Netflix has gradually begun to shift focus from an exclusive originals strategy to one that re-embraces third-party licensing. A decade ago, Netflix’s U.S. library boasted over 11,000 titles, cementing its status as Hollywood’s most voracious buyer. That number has since declined to around 6,000 as studios pulled back their content for their own platforms.

Now, many of those same studios are quietly reversing course. In the face of mounting losses and limited subscriber growth, licensing once again emerges as a viable revenue stream. As the most established platform with the broadest global footprint, Netflix is uniquely positioned to benefit. But smaller services like Max and Paramount+ also stand to gain by strategically licensing titles that no longer drive subscriber acquisition.

Although Netflix’s management currently resists the idea of licensing its own originals externally, the logic is becoming increasingly unassailable. Titles that have run their course could be redeployed to new platforms, especially in secondary windows, without jeopardizing Netflix’s core brand. What was once deemed taboo may soon become tactical.

Currently, Netflix has the second largest film catalog in the United States, behind only Max, with its access to releases by Warner Bros. Films account for 40% of Netflix’s demand in contrast to Max, where films account for 60% of demand among its users.

---

Monetizing the Library Without Cannibalizing the Brand

Not all Netflix originals are eligible for licensing—many are produced under contracts that include global exclusivity, and others may not offer meaningful secondary value. But for finished series, or early seasons of long-running shows, external licensing could offer a second wind. These titles have often delivered most of their lifetime value in terms of subscriber acquisition, and licensing them in non-exclusive windows could generate both cash flow and renewed interest in subsequent seasons on Netflix.

Crucially, Netflix must weigh the optics. Moving originals to competing platforms may risk eroding brand cachet or confusing consumers about where content lives (an ever-growing problem for consumers). Still, the argument against external licensing is beginning to ring hollow—especially given the precedent of Netflix’s reversal on advertising, which it once denied would ever be part of its model.

Studios, too, are realizing that investing $100–200 million into films that remain locked away on a proprietary platform isn’t a sustainable path. The old theatrical windowing model, with its multiple monetization phases—box office, electronic sell-through, DVD/VOD, Pay-1, broadcast, and Pay-2—generated revenue over time. Retaining originals exclusively sacrifices those downstream opportunities.

---

FilmTake Away: Syndication Isn’t a Relic—It’s a Rebalancing

As financial scrutiny intensifies across the streaming sector, syndication is no longer a fallback—it’s a strategic recalibration. Licensing originals to third-party platforms allow streamers to extract value from dormant assets, test alternative distribution models, and generate revenue without additional production spend. The companies willing to untether themselves from rigid exclusivity will unlock new levers for profitability. Far from an antiquated model, syndication is quietly becoming a savior in today’s hyper-competitive streaming business.

---