The acronym FAANG (Facebook, Apple, Amazon, Netflix and Google) is often used to describe the major players in the tech world. That’s always baffled me. As the old Sesame Street song goes, “One of these things is not like the others. One of these things just doesn’t belong ..."

That would be Netflix.

While Netflix is a wonderfully forward thinking company whose shows I enjoy on a regular basis, it is nowhere near being in the same league as any of the other four “FAANG” companies.

To begin with, it has just a single product and a single revenue stream, whereas the other four companies have multiple revenue streams based on a wide variety of products, both tangible (hardware) and intangible.

And while Netflix has planted a flag in most countries on earth, its presence in the vast majority of those countries does not extend much beyond that flag, as compared to say Google, whose search engine really is pretty much universal (save China) or Apple, whose iPhones also have global reach, or Facebook whose apps are the default interpersonal communications platform for much of the world.

Then there’s advertising.

Netflix doesn’t do it, not even almost, while three of the other four are heavily invested in it. The fourth, Apple, makes a lot of noise about not really being all that into ads, but Wall Street analysts estimate their ad business—primarily search ads on their App Store — is now worth around $3 billion and could triple over the next two years. 

Netflix is nowhere in the same league as any of the other four in terms of size, revenue, impact, global presence and participation in the global ad market.

I’ve never been clear as to why FAANG took off in the U.S., other than that it sounds sort of funny and the people using it really didn’t get Netflix’s role in the greater media/tech ecosystem.

It’s telling that Europeans don’t make much use of it. “GAFA” — Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon—is much more common there. While Netflix is definitely a force in Europe, it’s much less of one than it is in the U.S., and that may explain their disinclination to include Netflix in the tech pantheon.

That, or “FAANG” just doesn’t sound as clever in French.

The MAGMA Alternative

My friend Evan Shapiro, whose maps of the media landscape have become industry standards, proposed an alternate acronym that makes much more sense: MAGMA: Meta, Amazon, Google, Microsoft and Apple.

“Microsoft?” many of you are likely thinking. 

They are admittedly a name that does not come up much these days when talking about bright shiny tech objects.

That said, they own LinkedIn, whose 740 million users dwarf Twitter’s 192 million. What’s more, after the U.S., LinkedIn is most popular in India and China, the world’s two largest markets. (Netflix, by comparison, is not in China and is struggling mightily in India, where it only has 5 million users.)

Microsoft also owns the Xbox gaming device, which currently has over 100 million users worldwide, a dramatic jump from the 40 million it had five years ago in 2016.

There’s also Microsoft Teams, which, while it does not have the cachet of Google Docs, does have 250 million active users, many of whom were added during the pandemic by Zoom-phobic IT departments at large companies, but 250 million is still 250 million.

Finally, there’s Microsoft’s ad business, which is based on LinkedIn. It pulls in over $3 billion a year, largely on the premise that LinkedIn is the best social media app for B2B advertising.

So there’s all that, and the fact that while it’s easy to see any of the MAGMA companies buying Netflix, it’s unlikely that Netflix would buy one of them.

There’s also the fact that while Microsoft does not currently do much in the way of content creation beyond gaming (a booming part of the media ecosystem) they certainly have the wherewithal to jump into other areas via an acquisition. That said, given the rising prominence of gaming, especially among younger audiences, their massive presence there is not nothing, as the saying goes.

Beyond just satisfying a need to correctly identify the major players in the media-tech universe, adopting MAGMA would provide a better framework for everyone to understand  just how the media ecosystem is structured and how it is likely to evolve in the post-pandemic decade to come.

These five multibillion dollar global companies whose assets have such an outsized impact on so many aspects of our daily lives have an outsized impact on just about everything, and identifying them as such will also be critical to understanding how to keep them under control.

A day after shedding 600 points and after a week of heavy declines, the Dow Jones Industrial Average began clawing back on Friday, with cable stocks rising in the 2% to 7% range.

A favorable jobs report -- the U.S. added 312,000 new jobs in December-- helped lift the market and temper fears about the economy after a string of declines, driving the index to close at 23,433.16, up 746.9 points. The gains come after a 600-point drop Thursday, spurred by Apple reducing its quarterly revenue targets because of sluggish IPhone sales in China.

The Dow, down 8.7% in December -- its worst showing for that month since 1931 -- has had a better go of it in the first week of the New Year, rising 0.5%. In addition to the strong jobs data, Federal Reserve chairman Jerome Powell said the central bank would be patient regarding raising interest rates, which gave added hope to investors.

For media stocks, shares that were battered the most in 2018 seemed to fare the best on Friday. Dish Network, which lost 48% of its value in 2018, but was upgraded to “neutral” Thursday by influential analyst Craig Moffett of MoffettNathanson,  had the biggest gain -- up 7.1% to $28.29 per share. Other stocks that slowed in 2018 -- Charter Communications, Liberty Global, and Altice USA -- fared almost as well. Liberty Global, which shed 40% of its value in 2018 was up 6.4% to $22.76 per share and Charter, down 15.2% in 2018 increased 5.4% to $302.88 per share. Altice USA (down 22.2% in 2018) rose 1.7% to $17.41 and Comcast, down 15% in 2018, gained 3.4% on Friday, while Viacom (down 16.6% in 2018) was up nearly 2%.

Rounding out the sector, The Walt Disney Co. closed at $109.61 per share, up 3.1%; CBS finished at $47.71 (up 2.3); Discovery was priced at $26.16 (up 2%) and 21st Century Fox closed at $48.09 each, up 1.3%.

Technology stocks, battered over the past few weeks,  also had a much better showing.

Apple, which lost 10% of its value Thursday, gained some of that back Friday, closing at $148.26 each, up 4.3%. Netflix rose 9.6% to $297.34; Amazon was up 5% to $1,575.20; Google rose 5.3% to $1,069.80 and Facebook was up 4.7% to $137.96 per share. 

The Nasdaq Composite Index fell 1.6% Thursday, edging close to bear market territory as the three three major exchanges flirt with bringing and end to the bull market run that began after the 2009 financial crisis.

The tech-heavy Nasdaq is also home to many cable stocks, which seemed to weather the decline, with a few exceptions. The Nasdaq finished the day at 6,528, down about 19.5% from its high of 8,109 on Aug. 29. A bear market is defined as a 20% decline from a peak.

Other exchanges didn’t fare much better. The Dow Jones Industrial Average closed down more than 464 points on Thursday, its third straight day of triple-digit declines. And the S&P 500 was down 1.6%. Both exchanges are at their lowest points since the fall of 2017.

Cable stocks were mixed, with some big declines at Altice USA (3.7%), Dish (5.4%), AT&T (3.9%) and Discovery Inc. (3.9%), while others like Comcast, Charter and Disney managed to keep their losses between 1% and 2% for the day.

The so-called FAANG stocks were mixed, with Amazon dipping 2.3% and Netflix off 2.2%, while Apple and Google were down 2.5% and 1.3%, respectively. Facebook was relatively stable, down just 2 cents per share (0.02%) to $133.22 each. 

Tech stocks got hammered in another challenging trading day, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average sinking more than 550 points as investors continued to worry about trade issues.

Friday’s dismal showing -- the Dow closed at 24,388.55, down 558.72 points -- brought the index down 4.5% for the week. Coupled with a 4.6% weekly loss for the S&P 500 Index and a 4.9% weekly decline for the NASDAQ, the indexes are on track for their worst December start since 2008, according to the Wall Street Journal.

Of the so-called FAANG stocks, Netflix was hit hardest, falling 6.3% ($17.74 each) to $265.14 per share. Next was Amazon -- down 4.1% to $1,629.13, followed by Apple (off 3.6% to $168.38 per share); Google (down 3% to $1,036.58 each) and Facebook (down 1.6% to $137.42 per share). So far this month, Netflix stock is down 8.7%, Apple is down 8.9%, Amazon is down 8.1%, Google is down 6.3% and Facebook fared the best, losing just 2.6% of its value over the period.

Related: Tech Stocks Battered, Cable Mixed in Market Meltdown 

Cable stocks were relatively stable, with a few exceptions. On the distribution side, Charter Communications fell the most, down 3.4% ($11.08 per share) to $315.70 each. The rest of the sector kept their losses in the 1% range -- Comcast declined 1.2% to $37.41 on Dec. 7, while Cable One dipped just under 1% to $870.30 and Altice USA dipped 0.7% to $18.24 per share.

Programmers fared about the same -- Disney led losers with a 2.1% decline to close at $11.08 each, but the rest of the sector was down less than 1% for the day.

On the satellite side, Dish Network slipped just 8 cents each (0.25%) to $31.92 per share, while AT&T shed 1.3% (39 cents) to close at $30.14 each.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average plunged nearly 800 points Tuesday as investors remained skittish over uncertainties around U.S. trade policy with China, fueled by a morning tweet by President Trump. The meltdown battered most tech stocks but turned out to be a mixed bag for cable shares.

The Dow closed at 25,027.07 on Tuesday, down 799 points as enthusiasm waned concerning the 90-day tariff truce in the U.S.-China trade wars struck over the weekend, after President Trump tweeted “I am a Tariff Man.”

[embed]https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1069970500535902208[/embed]

Investors feared that animosity between the world’s two biggest economies could heighten, erasing any gains in the U.S. and rocking already shaky markets in Europe and Asia. 

The so-called FAANG stocks — Facebook, Amazon, Apple, Netflix and Google — had a rough day Tuesday, dropping between 2% and 5% each, while cable stocks were down but declines were not as severe.

Facebook fared the best of the FAANG stocks, closing at $137.93, down about 2.2% ($3.16 per share) while Netflix closed at $275.33 per share Tuesday, down $14.97 each or about 5.2%. Amazon fell 5.9% ($103.96 each) to close at $1,668.40 per share and Google dropped 5% ($55.61 each) to close at $1,050.82 per share. Apple dipped 4.4% ($8.13) to $176.69 per share.

Cable stocks fared a bit better, with declines in the 1% to 3% range.

Comcast fell hardest in the sector — down 3.7% ($1.46) to $37.69 per share, while Charter Communications dipped 1.5% ($4.86) to $321.84 each. Liberty Global dipped 2.1% and Altice USA was down 1.3% for the day, while Cable One was the sole gainer, rising 0.5% ($4.35 each) to $866.62 per share.

AT&T was down 3.1% (98 cents) to $30.73 and Verizon was essentially even, closing at $58.13 per share Monday, down 3 cents each. Dish Network had the biggest decline in the satellite sector, dropping 4.4% ($1.46 each) to $31.93 per share.

On the programming side, broadcaster CBS had the biggest decline, falling 4% ($2.16) to $51.35 per share. The rest of the sector was down between 1% and 2% each, with The Walt Disney Co. closing at $112.94 (down 2.4%), AMC Networks closing at $57.06 (down 2.1%); Viacom finishing the day at $30.88 (down 1.9%) and 21st Century Fox priced at $49.12 (down 1.1%).

WASHINGTON — The Federal Communications Commission is currently making its periodic assessment of just how competitive the market for communications services is, with an added impetus from Capitol Hill.

There is a lot riding on the answer, particularly in an increasingly over-the-top video marketplace. Comcast’s $38 billion-plus purchase of control of Sky, for example, is being billed more as about assembling a collection of programming assets that can be combined with other over-the-top offerings than it is about a satellite video service, MoffettNathanson principal and senior analyst Craig Moffett said.

At stake in the inquiry is how much regulatory power the FCC can wield over internet service providers, and how much the wired and wireless broadband markets can consolidate without running afoul of antitrust laws.

The FCC, even under the deregulatory Republican chairman Ajit Pai, has not rushed to declare that the competitive broadband marketplace includes both wired and wireless service — not for a lack of trying by both of those constituencies.

Two-Track Inquiry

But the agency is taking comments from stakeholders as part of a dual-track inquiry. The first track is the annual Section 706 report on whether advanced communications are being deployed in a reasonable and timely manner, conducted per a longstanding congressional directive.

The other is a new report mandated by the FCC’s recent reauthorization legislation that requires a report on the state of competition in the communications marketplace by year-end. That report must be published on the agency’s website and sent to Congress.

Cable and telco broadband providers have argued that their respective markets — fixed and mobile wireless broadband — are already competitive. They also argue that they’re competing with each other, and that will be even more the case with the advent of the 5G wireless specification and its increased data-delivery speeds.

The FCC has yet to concede that wireless is a substitute for wired broadband, given slower wireless speeds, but that’s only a tentative conclusion until all the comments are in and the reports are released.

If the FCC does not conclude that advanced services are being deployed to all Americans in a reasonable and timely manner, Congress has given the agency the power to achieve that end — including by regulating price and conditions. If it concludes that either the fixed or wireless markets are not competitive, industry players will have a harder time justifying mergers that reduce the number of competitors.

By contrast, an FCC finding that wireless and fixed broadband providers are market competitors enlarges the market and makes it easier to combine companies.

While the newly created report on market competition the FCC is producing is focused on competitiveness in the fixed broadband marketplace, NCTA–The Internet & Television Association saw no problem in pitching the agency on including wireless in those market calculations.

In fact, NCTA said the FCC has missed the mark by narrowing the inquiry. “Although the Notice only asks for information regarding fixed broadband services, RAY BAUM’s Act has no such limitation and, in fact, requires the commission to prepare a comprehensive analysis that addresses all facets of the communications marketplace.” (RAY BAUM’s Act, or the Repack Airwaves Yielding Better Access for Users of Modern Services Act of 2018, is the FCC reauthorization legislation passed earlier this year.)

The specific language of the act does require the FCC to “consider all forms of competition, including the effect of intermodal competition, facilities-based competition, and competition from new and emergent communications services, including the provision of content and communications using the Internet.”

USTelecom, representing Verizon Communications, AT&T and other mobile broadband providers, agreed. “The commission should not limit analysis narrowly to ‘fixed’ broadband, because mobile technology is increasingly competing for fixed broadband business and traditional notions of fixed broadband are changing,” the trade group told the FCC.

Given that charter, cable operators said, the FCC needs to look at the over-the-top competition as well, given that Google, Facebook and Amazon “are among the largest, most dominant companies in the world.”

Add the so-called FAANG companies (Facebook, Apple, Amazon, Netflix and Google) and wireless behemoths like Verizon and AT&T to the relevant competitive market for broadband and cable services, and there would arguably be plenty of room for further consolidation.

The NCTA even argues that the more ISPs increase their network reach, the stronger competitors that edge providers will become in provisioning video and data. That’s because they are riding on network buildouts to build their audiences.

“As broadband providers continue to increase the reach and capability of their networks, these online service offerings will only become more potent competitors to regulated voice and video services,” the NCTA told the commission.

Edge providers are showing up just about everywhere ISPs are talking to the government about the current regulatory landscape.

Cable operators and other service providers are tired of being targeted as the snake in the internet garden, and want the FAANG companies to be recognized as 800-pound competitive gorillas. Even Congressional Democrats, who’ve long talked up thegarage-innovator status of edge providers, are starting to see them that way.

Now it will be up to the FCC to help decide who is competitive with whom.

While media pundits hone their prognostication skills to determine what the next merger candidate will be in the wake of AT&T-Time Warner (besides Comcast-Fox or Disney-Fox), most are dubious that any of those deals will include the companies that arguably started the whole rush for scale: Facebook, Apple, Amazon, Netflix and Google, popularly known as FAANG.

Amazon, according to reports, toyed with the idea of joining Comcast in its $65 billion bid for 21st Century Fox assets, but talks never advanced. Apple also was said to have been thinking of bidding on Time Warner before AT&T announced its deal in October 2016, but again decided to hold off.

Related: AT&T Completes Time Warner Purchase 

While there has been speculation for years about when the big tech companies would make substantial plays for traditional media targets, it’s become clear they might not need to make any big acquisitions to achieve their goals.

Going it Alone’s Good for Netflix

Perhaps the best evidence for that is Netflix itself. Netflix may have toyed with the idea of selling out early in its development, but the company built its current empire largely from scratch, buying rights deals for cable shows and, more recently, leading the industry in originally produced content.

Amazon and Facebook have dipped their toes into programming, but haven’t yet made the major commitment some have expected. Instead, Amazon re-upped its deal for streaming rights for NFL Thursday Night Football and bought rights for a 20-match English Premier League soccer package outside the United States.

Facebook has a deal to stream Mixed Match Challenge, a 12-episode show that airs on Facebook Watch featuring WWE Raw and SmackDown wrestlers, but hasn’t yet made a big financial commitment to video, either.

Amazon, of course, has Amazon Prime Video, which has been growing nicely, offering original scripted series and movies and streaming the back catalogs of other networks. Amazon Studios is expected to continue to be a big player in content, although it will likely lag Netflix, which according to UBS is believed to be spending about $12.6 billion on non-sports content in 2018. Netflix has said it plans to end the year with 1,000 original movies and series, including 470 that will debut in the second half of the year.

Related: Netflix Investing 85% of New Spending in Originals

Despite the lack of activity, Pivotal Research Group CEO and senior media and communications analyst Jeff Wlodarczak said he expects the tech giants to be buyers not builders. Also, there isn’t that much left to buy.

“If Comcast gets Fox, I don’t see that many attractive content assets left for the FAANGs,” Wlodarczak said, although Discovery Inc., which bought Scripps Networks earlier this year, could be a target.

Others say it doesn’t matter. The old way of doing business — studios produce shows and try to sell them to networks, which in turn monetize them in as many ways on as many outlets as possible — is fading away faster than many have expected. Amazon and Netflix don’t sell content to networks: they use it on their direct-to-consumer services. And that may end up being the future as we know it.

Related: Amazon Prime Exceeds 100 Million Subs

BTIG media analyst Richard Greenfield, who has been a big proponent of the new paradigm (and chides the old one with the hashtag #goodluckbundle), sees the tech companies sitting out this merger and acquisition wave.

“I wouldn’t expect a flood of M&A,” Greenfield told Cheddar TV. “The media industry, especially after we get through this Comcast- Fox-Disney transaction, it’s a pretty consolidated sector. I think most of the tech companies — take a Netflix, take a Facebook, take a Google — I don’t think they have a lot of interest in buying legacy media companies. I think they’d rather invest and build out content and programming.”

Usual Suspects Might Be Quiet

MoffettNathanson media analyst Michael Nathanson wrote in a note to clients that he couldn’t see a wave of deals in the wake of the AT&T-Time Warner ruling either. Nathanson said CBS could be a target because it offers strategic value through retransmission consent revenue, an OTT presence via CBS All Access and live sports rights. But, he said, if deals between distributors and programmers were that compelling, they would have been done before. He couldn’t remember any past potential deals between distributors and programmers held back solely because of regulatory concerns.

“In all the years, we have never been asked, do you think the DOJ would allow Company X to buy [AMC Networks] or [Lionsgate]?” Nathanson wrote. “Also, it is far from clear who the distribution buyers for these assets will be.”