•  Lyor Cohen spent 30 years in the recorded-music industry and then after witnessing the rise of digital distribution, he swapped sides. As  YouTube's global head of music, he is overseeing the launch of YouTube's new subscription service.
• Cohen isn't just a former music industry insider. He waged a bare-knuckled public-relations fight against YouTube a decade ago when the two companies failed to come to terms on a licensing deal. 
• Cohen's renaissance as a digital executive may seem ironic, but it holds some valuable lessons for startup founders, media executives or anyone wishing to remake their career.  

On the day Lyor Cohen resigned as Chairman and CEO of Warner Music Group in September 2012, he appeared headed for obscurity.

I covered digital music back then, during the blackest period in the history of recorded music. The rise of digital distribution and music piracy had chopped annual revenue in half, from $14 billion to $7 billion. The top five recording companies were reduced to three.

During the freefall, I had seen countless middle-aged label managers flee the sector or get forced out. Finding another job in the business was near impossible. But Cohen refused exile.

Where once he attacked tech companies for not properly compensating music artists, Cohen surprised everyone — and angered some — by flipping sides. After three decades in the record business, Cohen is now global head of music at YouTube, the world’s premiere video-sharing site which he joined in 2016.

How he managed to claw back into center ring is a powerful testimonial for startup founders, media executives and anyone facing a downturn in their industry.

Don’t fear to venture into areas where you’re not an obvious fit

Cohen is 6-foot, 5-inches tall and blue-eyed. His parents immigrated to the United States from Israel. According to a 2001 story in Rolling Stone magazine, the fact that he was often the only white man working in urban music or that he sometimes faced anti-Semitism didn’t deter him.

He loved rap and hip hop and learned to spot and develop talent. He became skilled enough to eventually rise to the top of Def Jam, the famed recording company.

"Lyor is probably the coolest white dude in the game," Irv Gotti, a black record producer who worked with Jay-Z and DMX told Rolling Stone. "He's a white Jewish guy, but I think everybody respects him like he’s black.”

When Cohen and the now disgraced music impresario Russell Simmons sold Def Jam for more than $100 million, Cohen pocketed a fortune.

Cohen also isn’t a natural fit for tech. He battled digital music retailers at the negotiating table and in the press. Warner and the other labels sued some sites out of existence for enabling piracy. They even sued customers for file sharing. Yet, he’s now at YouTube.

Don’t pose. Play to your strengths and don’t hesitate to raise your voice

During the downturn in the music sector numerous displaced middle managers from the labels tried to adapt to the new environment by repackaging themselves as digital experts.

Not Cohen.

“I’m just a music guy,” Cohen said during an interview with Business Insider last week. “One of the things that I think that I’ve been really encouraged to do by (YouTube), and one of the things that I thought was most critical was to be my most authentic self.”

He says Google has plenty of technologists. He concerns himself with YouTube’s music experience. And of course, he oversees YouTube’s relationships with the big labels, Universal, Sony and his former employer, Warner.

It was at Warner where Cohen first interacted with YouTube. In 2008, YouTube and Warner had reached an impasse in negotiations over music licensing.

Back then, sources told me that at the 11th hour of protracted negotiations, Warner suddenly made new demands.

YouTube responded by pulling down Warner’s music from the site without warning (though Warner would insist it took its music down) and alerting the press. The message was clear: No deal. YouTube didn’t need Warner’s music at that price.

Warner is still the only major label to have refused to license YouTube, albeit only for a short time.

YouTube’s users posted so many unauthorized clips of Warner’s music videos that the label became overwhelmed trying to take them all down. Nine months later, Warner finally threw in the towel.  

In Cohen’s retelling of that period during our conversation, he downplayed the animosity that defined Warner and YouTube's early relationship, even casting himself as a peacemaker between the two sides.

Cohen: YouTube came to the record companies, negotiated licenses and then came back every three years to do it all again. And I said, because I didn’t understand, ‘Why is this happening? Why is YouTube and Google being vilified when they’re actually solving...

Business Insider: Wait. Let me stop you. I covered that. It was you. You were a hawk and...

Cohen: Excuse me...

He raised his voice to interject and moved his 6'5"  frame forward in his seat to get closer. The YouTube PR person stopped typing. Nobody moved. This is the Cohen I had heard about for years, the charmer who could instantly turn up the intensity in negotiations or with those who displeased him; the guy Doug Morris, the former Universal Music chief, once described as an "Israeli general."

Cohen: You have to understand the context, because yes I did pull our content from YouTube. But this was the context: It was very early on at YouTube and YouTube did not have a clean and well lit place for our premium content. So our CPMs suffered because advertisers didn’t know what they were going to get. Are they going to get a cat video or Jay-Z video. That’s what bothered me.

I kept going to them and saying ‘If you could separate your butcher market by having premium meats there and the sausage and the scraps over there, I’d be very happy.’

Business Insider: Were you correct? Did you take the correct position or…?

Cohen: Of course. You saw what they did. They cleaned it up. Now they solved …piracy is way down.

Don’t be afraid to rip up everything and start over. To create, you must be willing to destroy.

Cohen also provides a lesson in removing emotion from business decisions. He spent 30 years in music, forged friendships, and made millions. Then, he accepted the YouTube job and cast some of what he built away. To some in the music business, Cohen had betrayed them. One longtime music exec at an indie label told me last year that he considers Cohen nothing but an “opportunist.”

“Of course there are haters,” Cohen said last week, “but there are only haters if I actually paid attention. I don’t pay attention.”

The tech sector shouldn’t have any complaints. Afterall, Cohen only did what everybody in tech advised back when Napster, Grokster and LimeWire enabled widespread file sharing.

On message boards techies gleefully warned “old-media execs” to “adapt or die.”

And that’s sort of the advice that Cohen offers to his old business partners now.

Business Insider: What would you tell your critics in the music industry?

Cohen: Liberate yourself, and let’s move on. Let go of the CD. Get to know the people that frighten you.

Business Insider: Is that what you did?

Cohen: Yeah. Liberated myself. I can’t stand the CD.

Business Insider: But back in the day you...

Cohen: Enjoyed its benefits...It made us a lot of money. Anyhow what goes up comes down, the evolution of life. Get to know the people in tech and you’ll realize that they’re littered with people like T. Jay Fowler (one of the YouTube managers heading up the company’s new subscription music service that debuted on Tuesday). He’s actually a music executive who happens to work in tech. If they see and speak to him, they would realize he’s not out to hurt our business.

SEE ALSO: YouTube's Lyor Cohen says to forget about YouTube's rocky past with the music industry because the real threat is Spotify and Apple

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Jeff Bezos reveals what it's like to build an empire and become the richest man in the world — and why he's willing to spend $1 billion a year to fund the most important mission of his life

• More stories about George Clooney reportedly partying at the royal wedding reception are emerging.
• Clooney apparently danced with Meghan Markle and Kate Middleton at the after-party.
• Now people are saying he also poured shots of his own billion-dollar tequila brand, Casamigos, from behind the bar.

There are many things that make George Clooney one of the most likeable Hollywood A-listers on the planet: his political activism and humanitarian work, extreme generosity — he reportedly once gave 14 of his friends $1 million each— and the fact that he apparently likes a party, because who doesn't?

If rumours are to be believed, then George Clooney was part of the life and soul of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's royal wedding at the weekend, along with Serena Williams who reportedly slayed at beer pong.

Clooney, who is understood to have been among the select 200 guests invited to the evening reception at Frogmore House, is said to have danced with both Meghan Markle and Kate Middleton. Now, it's rumoured that he was also spotted pouring shots of his own billion-dollar tequila brand, Casamigos, from behind the bar.

Sources reportedly told Entertainment Tonight that at one point Clooney jumped behind the bar and began serving drinks.

"George hopped behind the bar and was actually bartending for a bit. He poured Casamigos drinks and shots and got everyone dancing," one source said.

Casamigos started as an idea between Clooney and friend Rande Gerber while they were in Mexico. The company was sold to Diageo for up to $1 billion (£790 million) in June 2017.

People are speculating that the connection between Casamigos and the royal wedding came through 31-year-old Jack Brooksbank, who will marry Harry's cousin Princess Eugenie in October, and who also just so happens to be an ambassador for the brand.

Gerber told Business Insider he and Clooney researched extensively to create a tequila they could drink all day without getting a hangover.

Prior to the Diageo sale the pair said they still taste every batch of the tequila, which is sold in 20 countries and doubled its volume of sales in 2016.

SEE ALSO: George Clooney dancing with Meghan Markle, 'dirty burgers,' and fireworks: Here's what apparently went down at the royal wedding after-party

SEE ALSO: George Clooney's tequila company just sold for $1 billion — here's the story of how it was set up by accident

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Why so many fast food logos are red

• Comcast signaled a new bidding war on Wednesday as it announced it was considering an all-cash offer for the 21st Century Fox assets that Disney already agreed to buy. 
• Comcast said in a statement that it hasn't made a final proposal, but "the work to finance the all-cash offer and make the key regulatory filings is well advanced."
• Disney agreed to buy most of 21st Century Fox's assets, excluding Fox News, Fox Business, and other properties, for $52 billion.

Comcast said Wednesday it was considering an all-cash bid for most of 21st Century Fox's assets to outbid Disney's previously announced offer. 

Reports earlier in May indicated that Comcast was speaking to investment banks, preparing a bid to surpass Disney's $52 billion offer. The assets Disney agreed to buy in December excluded the Fox News Channel and Fox Business Network, to avoid the regulatory scrutiny that would come with a single company owning ESPN and several other broadcast networks.

If Disney wins over Comcast, it would beef up its entertainment slate with cable channels like FX. The competing offer for 21st Century Fox's assets come amid ratings declines across TV broadcast networks, as more viewers opt for cheaper streaming and on-demand content.

Comcast's announcement escalated a bidding war that was already underway in Europe for Fox's satellite business. Comcast made a £22 billion ($30 billion) offer for the 61% stake it doesn't already own in the European pay-TV group Sky. 

Comcast said it hasn't made a final proposal, but "the work to finance the all-cash offer and make the key regulatory filings is well advanced." Earlier reports indicated that Comcast was waiting on a US judge's ruling on AT&T's planned acquisition of Time Warner before submitting an offer for Fox.

Comcast shares fell by as much as 2% in premarket trading, and 21st Century Fox gained more than 1%. 

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Jeff Bezos on breaking up and regulating Amazon

It's the end of May, which means it's finale season in the television world.

As shows on the air wrap up their seasons and their runs, and try to pull viewers in with very dramatic episodes, we're fondly looking back on some of the most shocking finales ever.

Finales are usually some of the best episodes of TV shows. They wrap up the season, or the series, and pull a twist or two that leave viewers hanging until the next season (or in some cases, forever). 

Here, we collected some of the most shocking season and series finales that left us shaken from a twist, revelation, or character moment. 

Here are 15 of the most shocking TV finales of all time, from "Lost" to "The Good Place":

SEE ALSO: All 11 'X-Men' movies, ranked from worst to best — including 'Deadpool 2'

"The Sopranos" — season 6 episode 21, "Made in America"

When it aired: June 10, 2007

The series finale of "The Sopranos" was so shocking and abrupt that millions of people watching live assumed their power had gone out. The Soprano family meets at a diner for dinner, Meadow struggles to parallel park, and once the entire family is at the table, the screen goes black without explanation. 

"Penny Dreadful" — season 3 episode 9, "The Blessed Dark"

When it aired: June 19, 2016

The third and planned final season of "Penny Dreadful" packed in a lot of plot and new characters. It was messy in good ways and bad. In its shocking series finale, which was jam-packed with some of the best action ever made for the small screen, its main character, Vanessa (played by Eva Green) begs her on-and-off lover Ethan (played by Josh Hartnett) to kill her to save the world from complicated supernatural beings. 

"Lost" — season 3 episodes 22 and 23, "Through the Looking Glass"

When it aired: May 23, 2007

The season three finale of "Lost" took an unprecedented turn for a network series, or even any TV series. In the two-part finale, it's revealed that the flashbacks shown throughout the season have actually been flash forwards. What a twist!

"Star Wars" villains seem to generally fall into four categories: droids, weird-looking aliens, bounty hunters, or people with cool capes. 

A lot of them are more cool-looking than they are actually compelling villains. Boba Fett, for instance, is a popular villain, but his costume is better than he actually is, at least by movie standards.

I know there's a whole expanded universe of TV, books, and comics. But when looking at the movies alone, there are only a handful of "Star Wars" villains who are truly worthy.

"Supreme Leader" Snoke didn't do anything worthwhile on screen and the most notable thing Count Dooku ever did was get his head sliced off.

But the "Star Wars" villains that are worthy are some of the best villains and characters ever portrayed on screen, so that makes up for any pitfalls the franchise has in regards to villainy.

Darth Vader is synonymous with "Star Wars" and Kylo Ren has positioned himself as a classic bad guy thanks to a great performance from Adam Driver and an engaging backstory.

With "Solo: A Star Wars Story" coming to theaters soon, Business Insider ranked 30 villains from the "Star Wars" movies.

Below are 30 "Star Wars" movie villains, ranked from worst to best:

SEE ALSO: 'Star Wars' screenwriter is against using a 'Guardians of the Galaxy' tone: 'To me, it isn’t what "Star Wars" is'

30. BB-9E

I don't think I'm alone when I say that I had high expectations for this little evil droid that were shattered by its mere two seconds of screen time in "The Last Jedi."

29. Unkar Plutt

Plutt doesn't do anything of note other than alert the First Order that BB-8 is on Jakku in "The Force Awakens." He's the junk boss of that planet, and is kind of a junk villain — meaning he's easy to throw away.

28. Zam Wessell

Almost anything having to do with "Attack of the Clones" is better left forgotten, including the shape-shifting assassin Zam Wessell. She's not a very good assassin, because she fails to kill Padme, gets captured by Anakin and Obi-Wan, and then is shot by Jango Fett. 

• The PlayStation 4 is here to stay — at least for now.
• The new head of PlayStation, John Kodera, said it'll be another three years before we see a PlayStation 5.
• "We will use the next three years to prepare the next step, to crouch down so that we can jump higher in the future," Kodera said.

The PlayStation 5 is still at least three years away — it'll be an entirely new decade by the time its ready to go.

At least that's the word from the new head of Sony's PlayStation division, John Kodera. "We will use the next three years to prepare the next step," Kodera said in a meeting with reporters, according to the Wall Street Journal, in a reference to the PlayStation 4's successor.

With over 75 million PlayStation 4 consoles in the wild, sales for the massively popular game system are finally slowing. Sony's PlayStation 4 sales estimates for the current fiscal year project fewer consoles sold than the previous year — for the first time since the console went on sale in November 2013.

But that doesn't mean it's time for the next PlayStation console just yet.

Instead, Sony's planning to focus on wringing revenue from services like its PlayStation Plus program. "We’re no longer in a time when you can think just about the console or just about the network like they’re two different things," Kodera said.

The PlayStation Plus service costs $60 annually, and has over 30 million subscribers. It offers access to online multiplayer gaming, provides a library of games, and other benefits.

It's services like PlayStation Plus — and the PlayStation Vue streaming TV service — that Sony's planning to lean on.

There's at least one other good reason that Sony isn't moving on from the PlayStation 4 just yet: The PlayStation 4 Pro exists.

Less than two years ago, Sony launched the PlayStation 4 Pro: A more powerful update to the PlayStation 4. It plays the same games, but makes them look prettier and load more quickly.

It's a kind of half step up, in terms of horsepower, from the PlayStation 4. If you're buying a new PlayStation 4 at this point, and you have a 4K/HDR-capable television, you should buy a PlayStation 4 Pro.

Sony's PlayStation 4 is in a strong position. Over 75 million consoles have been sold, putting Sony in first place by a long shot, and a relatively new PS4 console is on sale for the other 6.93 billion people who don't own one yet. The company already has a large base of players to sell games to, and its hardware lineup is relatively fresh.

That means Sony can enjoy the higher profits that come with game, accessory, and subscription sales while continuing to sell new consoles, thus increasing its userbase (which increases its number of potential game buyers, etc.).

In so many words, there are strong financial arguments for Sony not moving on from the PlayStation 4 — at least for now.

SEE ALSO: Don't expect the next PlayStation, Xbox, or Nintendo console anytime soon

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Google's new AI can impersonate a human to schedule appointments and make reservations

• A mistake from the model of the Millennium Falcon made it into the full-size set.
• According to "Star Wars: A New Hope" set decorator Roger Christian, a photo of an unfinished version of a model of the Falcon being made in the US got to Christian and the production design team in the UK, and was built into the full-scale version.
• But don't look too hard, even Christian doesn't know exactly where the mistake is.

It turns out the unique look of the Millennium Falcon is partly because of a mistake during the design of the famous “Star Wars” ship.

During preproduction of “Star Wars: A New Hope,” the production design team in the UK had a strange way of communicating with the visual effects team back in America, and it led to an error being built into the full-scale set of the Falcon.

According to Roger Christian, who was set decorator on “A New Hope” (and earned an Oscar for his work on the movie), both teams showed their work to each other by mailing a pouch across the pond every week. Christian and his fellow set designers would mail the VFX team the pouch every Tuesday with photos showing how their work on the building of the Falcon was going, and every Thursday the pouch would return from the States showing photos of the models being built of the ship.

The two teams had to stay in constant contact to make sure both the sets and models, which would be used for the shots of the Falcon flying in space, were the same. And because this was 1975-1976, it was long before email and even fax machines.

Then one Thursday, Christian said, the pouch returned with a note from visual effects artist Joe Johnston that read, “You built in my mistake.”

It turns out the previous round of photos of the model sent to the UK were taken before Johnston was finished with it.

"Just before they photographed it, Joe didn't like one piece and pulled it off, expecting to replace it," Christian told Business Insider. "They photographed it before he did that. The photo came back in the pouch and we built it. So somewhere on the Millennium Falcon there's glue marks where a piece is missing that we built full-scale.”

So where is the mistake on the ship? We’ll probably never know.

“Neither Joe or I can remember where it is exactly,” Christian said. “It's on there somewhere."

Chalk this up as just another legend to add to the lore of “Star Wars” and its most iconic ship.

SEE ALSO: A creator of the original Millennium Falcon describes how the legendary "Star Wars" ship was made was airplane scarps and lots of imagination

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Tina Brown: Why Melania Trump is the best aspect of the Trump presidency

Spotify has shared a list of 16 songs that the streaming service predicts could become the most popular tracks of the summer. 

Spotify's list includes recent Billboard No. 1 hits like Drake's "Nice for What" and Childish Gambino's "This Is America," alongside a 2018 album cut from rapper Cardi B, and a new collaboration from Pharrell Williams and pop singer Camila Cabello. 

The company said in a release that its list was compiled "based on factors such as a song’s chart performance, listener engagement in playlists, current trajectory, industry buzz and good old-fashioned gut instincts."

Here are the top 16 song of the summer contenders, according to Spotify:

SEE ALSO: Donald Glover fans have taken over a popular Trump fan page on Reddit

16. "Youth" — Shawn Mendes feat. Khalid

15. "Solo" — Clean Bandit feat. Demi Lovato

14. "Burn the House Down" — AJR

• Meghan Markle became an instant fashion icon after her engagement to Prince Harry. 
• Her sister-in-law, Kate Middleton, has been hugely influential in shaping fashion over the past decade.
• The two have very different styles. As the royal wedding has now come and gone, we took a look at how they match up.

All eyes have been on Meghan Markle in the days before and after the royal wedding. 

Since news broke that Markle was dating Prince Harry, her profile skyrocketed, and she became an international fashion icon. It's a role that only one other woman in recent memory can directly identify with — her sister-in-law Kate Middleton. 

It's rare for the royals to speak their minds in public. That goes double for Middleton and Markle. As women in the spotlight, anything they do can spark backlash. As a result, fashion can provide a way for them to express themselves.

As Markle prepared to marry Harry, we found ourselves wondering how she would compare to Middleton when it comes to fashion. And, with the wedding in the rearview mirror, our fascination with figuring out how Markle will both compare and differentiate herself has only grown.

Here's how Markle, the Duchess of Sussex, measures up to Middleton, the Duchess of Cambridge:

SEE ALSO: Brands like Burger King, KFC, and Velveeta are doing everything they can to cash in on the royal wedding's $1.4 billion goldmine

Let's start with a Markle specialty: movie premieres. As an actress, she has plenty of experience dressing for the red carpet.

It's a pretty simple look — a little black dress with strappy heels. Cute, but nothing groundbreaking.

As a duchess, Middleton also attends plenty of premieres. Here she is in 2012, at the premiere of "War Horse."

Are you ready for a bunch of new games for Sony's PlayStation 4 and Microsoft's Xbox One? Because they're coming!

On the cusp of their respective five-year anniversaries, the Xbox One and PlayStation 4 are going head-to-head once more at the annual video game trade show E3 in mid-June. 

But, thanks in part to a massive leak and in part to Sony just outright talking about its plans, we already know a lot about what Sony and Microsoft plan to show this year. 

Here's a look at what to expect from both PlayStation 4 and Xbox One at E3 2018:

Sony's plans for E3 2018, broadly speaking:

Sony's annual E3 press briefing on all things PlayStation is Monday, June 11 at 9:00 p.m. EST / 6:00 p.m. PDT.

As always, Sony will broadcast its briefing on several platforms — Twitch, YouTube, and Facebook are all hosting streams of the event. 

The E3 briefing is Sony's annual opportunity to announce major PlayStation games, show off upcoming games, and — generally speaking — address its most loyal fans directly. It's the kind of event where Sony might reveal a major new "Uncharted" game (for example only — it's unlikely that a new "Uncharted" game shows up anytime soon). 

Usually, it's an event full of surprise reveals intended to wow viewers. But at E3 2018, Sony is doing something different: Telling everyone ahead of time what it's going to show. Madness!

Here's Sony's full line-up:

"Death Stranding"

What is "Death Stranding"? That's a great question. Even though I've seen several trailers for the game, I have no idea what it is.

Here's what we know for sure:

— The game is being created by "Metal Gear" series creative lead Hideo Kojima, a legendary character in the video game business.
— It stars Norman Reedus, of "The Walking Dead" fame. He's the main character. Mads Mikkelsen, a Danish actor best known as the bad guy from "Casino Royale," appears to be the antagonist.
— The game is a collaboration between Hideo Kojima and famed film director Guillermo del Toro.
— It's being funded by Sony, which means the game is only coming to the PlayStation 4.

Is it a first-person or third-person game? A survival game? Open world, or linear? All of this stuff is still up in the air.

Here's an eight minute trailer for "Death Stranding" — if you can piece it together, more power to you!

Youtube Embed:
//www.youtube.com/embed/XcuFJXgU6cA
Width: 800px
Height: 450px

• MoviePass has repeatedly said it's not worried about sustaining further losses because it has a $300 million "equity line of credit" that could keep it going for over a year.
• Financial experts, however, say the financial instrument described by MoviePass CEO Mitch Lowe is not what is generally considered to be an equity line of credit and is subject to the whims of the public market.
• To access that money, MoviePass will have to convince investors of its long-term viability and potential for profit.
• On Wednesday, MoviePass' parent company, Helios and Matheson Analytics, was trading at an all-time low of $0.46, down more than 98% from its 52-week high, with a market cap under $39 million. 

Don't worry, everything is fine.

That has been the message from MoviePass and its parent company, Helios and Matheson Analytics, in recent weeks as the company's financial health has become a topic of heated debate.

MoviePass has been burning more than $20 million a month, but its leadership has repeatedly stressed that it has access to a $300 million "equity line of credit."

The comments were intended to address concerns that MoviePass might go out of business. The lifeline meant the company could sustain itself for over a year without needing additional funds — long enough to figure out how to stem its substantial losses.

But it has become clear after speaking with MoviePass CEO Mitch Lowe, consulting financial experts, and reviewing Helios and Matheson's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission that the $300 million in financial firepower is less secure than at first blush and dependent on selling shares to a fickle public market. And it's not really a "line of credit" as generally defined by the financial community.

To access that money, MoviePass has to convince investors of its prospects — a big ask, given that Helios and Matheson's stock is down over 98% from its 52-week high in October. Shares were trading at an all-time low of $0.46 on Wednesday, and the entire company is now valued at under $39 million.

The state of affairs for MoviePass

Helios and Matheson disclosed in filings this month that it had been losing nearly $23 million a month in the first quarter (though the company also said it had found a way to cut losses by more than 35%).

It had only $15.5 million cash on hand at the end of April, and some industry observers, including the CEO of AMC Theatres, publicly questioned how it would keep going. Helios and Matheson's independent auditor said it had "substantial doubt" about the company's ability to survive a year.

MoviePass' leadership fired back, with Helios and Matheson's CEO, Ted Farnsworth, telling Variety he was "not worried at all" about the cash situation.

Why? He said Helios and Matheson had a "$300 million equity line of credit," a term he used in an email (via a spokeswoman) to Business Insider. Articles on MoviePass by The New York Times, Reuters, and Variety have also mentioned it.

The 'equity line of credit' question

So this lifeline would supposedly save MoviePass for at least another year. But what exactly is this "equity line of credit" MoviePass keeps talking about?

Lowe told Business Insider that the term referred to the "at-the-market" (ATM) sale of the remainder of a shelf offering certified by the SEC.

By Business Insider's calculations (based on SEC filings), less than $265 million remained of the original $400 million as of April.

Here is Lowe's explanation in full:

"So the SEC approved for Helios and Matheson the ability to sell up to $300 million of its stock in the format of what is called an ATM. An ATM essentially means you can put on the market shares on a daily, weekly basis, and feed them into the market, and as long as people want to buy them, then that money can go into the coffers of HMNY and therefore go into MoviePass to fund our growth — to fund our ticket purchasing and our acquisition of subscribers.

"It's kind of a science in that you can't put all $300 million out there. You put a little bit every day. If you look at how many shares are sold every day, I think there are some days 25 million shares, 10 million shares — I think the average is 6 million shares — so you can imagine you can put four or five hundred thousand shares out there without having much impact on the demand.

"I have no idea. It's a third party that manages it on behalf of HMNY, but essentially some days they might sell, some days they might not sell. It's all kind of based on what they believe will have the least impact on the valuation."

What Lowe is describing is an at-the-market offering, not what is usually considered to be an equity line of credit, according to several financial experts.

A Wall Street analyst who covers Helios and Matheson told Business Insider that an equity line of credit was a "confusing" way to characterize such a stock offering. Erik Gordon, a professor at the University of Michigan's Ross School of Business, said it was "not the way most people think of an equity line of credit."

MoviePass did not respond to multiple requests for further clarification.

Why is it not a line of credit?

An equity line of credit implies that an investor has already agreed to buy shares at a maximum offering price. (A guide from the law firm Morrison & Foerster explains it in more detail.) It's money in the bank if the company wants to take it, during a certain period and under certain conditions.

But in an at-the-market offering, which Lowe is describing, Helios and Matheson is at the mercy of the public market. It is authorized to sell shares, but someone has to buy them. It is not a guaranteed line of credit.

Todd Lowenstein, the director of research at Highmark Capital, explained to Business Insider that the idea behind an offering like the one Helios and Matheson is using is that you do the SEC paperwork up front, then time the selling of shares based on your need as you prove your business model.

Farnsworth told Variety this month that Helios and Matheson had "17 months' worth of cash without further raises of capital."

But as Lowe describes it, the ATM offering is effective only "as long as people want to buy" the shares. That is not certain, given the negative investor outlook on the company evident in the stock price.

What are MoviePass' chances?

"If they can sell stock, the most likely buyers are related parties, bottom-feeders, or people who think the company is on the cusp of a turnaround," Gordon said. "It is unlikely to be an easy sell."

At this stage, those who would be buying are the "true believers," Lowenstein said. And if Helios and Matheson has to sell tons of stock to cover its costs, after such a huge drop in price, it would massively dilute previous shareholders.

MoviePass is also at risk of getting kicked off the Nasdaq by mid-December if its share price and market cap don't increase, as my colleague Troy Wolverton noted recently. Lowenstein called it the "specter of delisting" hanging over the company's head.

The big question now is whether MoviePass can keep investors happy long enough to find a way to become profitable — because the line of credit that was supposed to sustain the company could easily slip out of its grasp.

Its survival depends on it.

Additional reporting by Jason Guerrasio.

If you have any information about MoviePass, tip the author at nmcalone@businessinsider.com.

SEE ALSO: Demand for TV ads 'has never been higher,' and it could give the TV business one last windfall

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Mark Cuban and Barbara Corcoran invested $400,000 in this avocado-only restaurant

• Netflix recently signed a production deal with Barack and Michelle Obama.
• Obama spoke publicly about his deal with Netflix at a tech conference on Wednesday, which he said will focus on identifying and promoting people with interesting and important stories to tell that can help everyone around the world better understand each other.

On Monday, Netflix announced that it had signed a multimillion deal with former president Barack Obama and former first lady Michelle Obama, and on Wednesday, Obama spoke publicly about the deal for the first time.

Obama was speaking at a tech conference in Las Vegas hosted by identity security company Okta when he was asked about the deal.

Obama explained that the Netflix deal was going to be focused on telling people's stories. He said he hopes these stories will help people see and better understand one another and ultimately help us move past the divisive political discourse that has mired Washington for so long.

"I would not have been president had I not learned very early on in my professional career the importance of stories," Obama told a standing-room-only crowd of thousands of people.

He recounted his first job out of college as a community organizer, helping bring various factions together to solve local problems from crime to underfunded schools. An older, experienced community organizer told the young Obama at the time that before he started to suggest solutions to problems, he should spend a month talking to people and hearing their stories. 

"Everyone has a story that is pretty sacred" about the significant events in their lives, he said. Listening led to relationships, which led to people working together.

The Obamas used that lesson on the importance of listening when the future president campaigned for the Senate and presidency.

"We want to tell stories," he said, "This [Netflix deal] becomes a platform. We are interested in lifting people up and identifying people doing amazing work."

"We did this in the White House," he said. 

"For instance, the very first time Lin-Manuel Miranda performed the first song in Hamilton was at the White House at a poetry slam we did," he said. At the time, Miranda had already won a Tony for "In the Heights." 

Obama asked him what he planned to perform and he said, "I’m going to do a rap about the first treasury secretary." Obama said he wryly replied, "Ok, good luck with that."

Another time was when Obama's good friend Bruce Springsteen did an intimate performance for the Obamas and their senior staff as a gift. He has since turned that into his current Broadway play Bruce in the USA, where he weaves music with stories from his life together. 

That's the kind of content Obama imagines he'll produce for Netflix, he said, stories "we think are important, and lift up and identify talent, that can amplify the connections between all of us," he said. "I continue to believe that if we are hearing each other's stories and recognizing ourselves in each other, then our democracy works."

"We are all human. I know this sounds trite, and yet, right now globally, we have competing narratives," he said.

As the world grapples with issues caused by globalization or migration, there are two ways to respond. Humans have historically responded by feeling threatened. "We go tribal. We go ethnic. we pull in, we push away," he said. 

But in the last 70-80 years, led by America and its ideal of freedom and democracy, "We can think and reason and connect and set up institutions based on rule of law and a sense of principals and the dignity and worth of every individual."

Obama acknowledged that America, both at home and abroad, hasn't always lived up to those ideals, particularly when it came to racism or gender equality. But he said we've made steady progress, "in fits and starts."

"And now there’s a clash in those two ways of seeing the world," he said, without naming any names or current political figures.

"I’m putting my money on the latter way," Obama told the conference crowd. "That’s what we hope to be a voice to, through Netflix and through my foundation, where we’re identifying and training the next generation of leaders here in the United States and around the world. So they can start sharing their stories and cooperating."

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Why you should never release your pet goldfish into the wild

The best game I've played in 2018, and the best game I played last year, are the same as the best game I played way back in 2016.

That game, of course, is Blizzard Entertainment's masterpiece "Overwatch."

As Business Insider's only reporter wholly focused on video games, I play as many as I can — but I always make time for "Overwatch." It's been the one constant in my gaming habit since it arrived back in May 2016. 

Here are just a few of the reasons why, after literally hundreds of hours playing "Overwatch," I keep coming back for more:

SEE ALSO: The 34 hottest video games you shouldn't miss in 2018

1. The core of "Overwatch" is immensely enjoyable and well-designed.

In case you're totally unfamiliar, here's a quick primer on "Overwatch":

It's a so-called "class-based first-person shooter," which means it's like "Call of Duty" (a first-person shooter) except you play as one of 27 unique characters. Each of those characters is part of a "class" — healers can heal themselves and/or teammates, defense characters are built for defending, etc. Playing on a team of six unique characters, your goal is to complete one of several objectives before the other team can.

It's a simple concept that Blizzard meticulously crafted into something magical. There are loads of online, multiplayer-focused first-person shooters out there, from "Call of Duty" to "Battlefield" to "Star Wars Battlefront." But "Overwatch" stands out because of its tremendous attention to detail.

Take just the game's controls, for example: There is one set of controls across all 27 characters, yet each character is remarkably different and nuanced. No two characters play the same, yet all of them are controlled using the same easy-to-understand layout.

At once, the game is superficially accessible and tremendously deep. That's "Overwatch" in a nutshell.

2. "Overwatch" is always growing.

Since the game's launch, "Overwatch" has grown significantly.

It started with 21 characters, and has since added six entirely new ones. The same can be said for maps and game modes, to say nothing of the ongoing ranked "seasons" of the game (which add a layer of sports-like ranking to the game's online modes). 

Tired of playing the game's standard capture the objective mode? Jump into the Arcade section and play Deathmatch, or one-on-one, or Capture the Flag. 

It's standard shooter stuff, don't get me wrong — what makes "Overwatch" stand out is how completely different each character is.

3. "Overwatch" is built on variety.

"Overwatch" is largely praised by critics and fans for its broad representation of the world's cultures and different people. On a gameplay level, though, "Overwatch" is similarly varied. With 27 characters, you might think one or two play similarly — and you'd be wrong.

What makes "Overwatch" so enticing for me is thinking about all the characters I've yet to even try playing. For the most part, I focus on one or two main characters as my standards: Pharah and Torbjörn. 

Since each character feels so distinct, and comes with so much nuance to learn, there's a tremendous depth to "Overwatch" that gives it endless replayability. It's so easy to come back to, over and over and over, for precisely this reason

Cliffhangers are a plot device prevalent in modern fiction, but they have been taken to particularly nail-biting heights in television.

The concept originated in the Middle Ages, in a work of Arabic fiction called "One Thousand and One Nights," and Charles Dickens used the device in some of his stories in the Victorian Era. But the term "cliffhanger" didn't come into being until 1873, when Thomas Hardy's "A Pair of Blue Eyes" ended with the protagonist literally hanging off of a cliff.

While cliffhangers are used in many methods of storytelling, from film to novels, they're most commonly used in television, and particularly in season finales. They get viewers to watch dramatic episodes live, and the unfinished ending will get people to tune in for the next season. 

Here, we collected some of the best and most iconic cliffhangers in television, from "The West Wing" to "Game of Thrones":

SEE ALSO: 15 of the most shocking TV finales of all time

"Twin Peaks" — season 2 episode 8, "The Last Evening"

When it aired: May 23, 1990

Like many cliffhangers on this list, "The Last Evening" ended with a character getting shot. In this case, shots are fired at Agent Cooper (Kyle MacLachlan) three times, and the episode ends. Fans speculated about Cooper's fate for months until the second season premiered and revealed Cooper survived. 

"Friends" — season 4 episode 24, "The One With Ross' Wedding Part II"

When it aired: May 7, 1998

The gang travels to London for Ross' wedding to Emily. But, in a slightly expected twist, Ross accidentally calls his fiance "Rachel" during the ceremony, and the episode ends right after. It wasn't the most cleverly placed cliffhanger, but it kept fans desperate until the season five premiere, which showed the events following his massive mistake. 

"The West Wing" — season 1 episode 22, "What Kind of Day Has It Been"

When it aired: May 17, 2000

The season one finale ends with a shooting. As pretty much every major cast member exits a building, multiple snipers begin shooting at them. The shots continue, and we see various characters on the ground, trying to get away. As the screen goes black, someone says, "Who's been hit?"

Decades before Netflix original films existed, HBO transformed the critical perception of what a "TV movie" could be. 

For years, HBO cornered the market on quality original films for at-home consumption, routinely cranking out critically acclaimed documentaries and biopics or dramas with notable Hollywood names.  

The cable network has had its fair share of misfires as well, including its most recent feature, a critically panned adaptation of Ray Bradbury's "Fahrenheit 451."

But altogether, with biopics like "Gia," starring Angelina Jolie as the heroin-addicted supermodel Gia Carangi, or Claire Danes' role as the revolutionary autistic scientist "Temple Grandin," HBO has produced many acclaimed films and performances since it released its first original movie, "The Deadly Game," in 1982. And now thanks to on-demand streaming, if you are an HBO subscriber you can watch the whole back catalog through either HBO Go or HBO Now.

To figure out which HBO original films are worth seeking out, we turned to the reviews aggregator Rotten Tomatoes and compiled every HBO film that had above a 70% "fresh" rating on the site. We excluded HBO coproductions that were distributed in theaters by other studios. 

Here are the 41 best HBO original movies of all time, according to critics:

SEE ALSO: All 49 of Netflix's notable original movies, ranked from worst to best

41. "Barbarians at the Gate" (1993)

Critic score: 71%

Audience score: 73%

Summary: "CEO F. Ross Johnson has just been burned by a failed product and begins drawing up plans to buy the company outright so he'll have no one to answer to but himself. Unfortunately for Johnson, his company is being coveted by a sharkish 'buyout king.'"

40. "Hysterical Blindness" (2002)

Critic score: 73%

Audience score: 62%

Summary: "Two aging single women in 1980s New Jersey enact a routine of deluded barroom romance."

39. "The Wizard of Lies" (2017)

Critic score: 73%

Audience score: 63%

Summary: "In 2008, stockbroker, investment advisor and financier Bernie Madoff made headlines around the world when he was arrested for perpetrating perhaps the largest financial fraud in U.S. history."

• During an interview with the New York Times published Wednesday, "Arrested Development" star Jason Bateman was quick to defend Jeffrey Tambor, who had admitted to verbally abusing their co-star, Jessica Walter.
• Walter said through tears that the way Tambor treated her was unlike anything she ever experienced in 60 years in the industry.
• Bateman has since apologized on Twitter, saying he was "incredibly embarrassed" that he mansplained a victim.

"Arrested Development" star Jason Bateman has apologized for his defense of verbally abusive behavior in the entertainment industry. In a series of tweets sent out on Thursday, Bateman said he was "deeply sorry," that he shouldn't have tried to "mansplain," and that he was "incredibly embarrassed."

In a New York Times interview with the "Arrested Development" cast published Wednesday, the male actors from the show (excluding Michael Cera, who was not present) defended Jeffrey Tambor in front of Jessica Walter, who, through tears, said that Tambor's abusive language on set years ago hurt her. 

In an interview with The Hollywood Reporter this month, Tambor discussed getting fired from Amazon's "Transparent" after two allegations of sexual harassment surfaced against him in November (which he denies). In the same interview, he mentioned a "blowout" with Walter on the "Arrested Development" set. 

Many readers were shocked to see the "Arrested Development" men jump to defend Tambor, including Jason Bateman, who defended Tambor by saying his behavior was normal in the entertainment industry. "It's a weird thing, and it is a breeding ground for atypical behaviour and certain people have certain processes," he said.

But Walter disagreed. “Almost 60 years of working," Walter said through tears, "I’ve never had anybody yell at me like that on a set and it’s hard to deal with, but I’m over it now.”

Actress Alia Shawkat also chimed in to disagree with Bateman's stance that behavior like Tambor's on set was normal: "That doesn't mean that it's acceptable, and that's the point is that things are changing and people need to respect each other."

After uproar about Bateman's comments in the interview, he took to Twitter to apologize.

"I’m horrified that I wasn’t more aware of how this incident affected her," Bateman wrote. "I’m incredibly embarrassed and deeply sorry to have done that to Jessica. This is a big learning moment for me. I shouldn’t have tried so hard to mansplain, or fix a fight, or make everything okay."

SEE ALSO: MoviePass said a $300 million lifeline could sustain it for over a year, but that money could slip through its fingers

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Why so many fast food logos are red

For the first time in nearly a decade, this year's "Battlefield" game is returning to World War II. 

The game's name: "Battlefield 5".

That's right — despite the last game in the series being named "Battlefield 1" — the series is returning to a standard numbering convention.

Semantics aside, "Battlefield 5" promises to be the largest "Battlefield" game yet. Here's everything we learned about it in a recent briefing from the folks behind the "Battlefield" series, EA's DICE studios.

SEE ALSO: The 34 hottest video games you shouldn't miss in 2018

The first major change from previous "Battlefield" games is character customization: It's a core component of "Battlefield 5," both in terms of looks and gameplay.

"Battlefield 5" is set in World War II, but isn't intended as homage — it's a setting for large-scale multiplayer combat. To that end, there's a level of character customization in "Battlefield 5" that's unprecedented in the series.

The game's debut trailer showcases British forces taking on German forces in what looks like Western Europe. It also showcases the British woman you see above with the metal hand. 

Though it's possible that there was a female soldier with a metal hand fighting for England, the intention here is to demonstrate the game's fictionalized approach to the era. Simply put: The metal hand is a nod to player customization.

Yes, you will be able to purchase items for your characters. No, it won't impact gameplay.

The same company behind "Battlefield 5" was behind "Star Wars Battlefront 2": Electronic Arts (EA). 

When that game arrived late last year — a multiplayer-focused shooter set in the "Star Wars" universe — it was derided by fans and critics for its microtransactions. In short, players felt ripped off by the in-game store, which charged real money for loot boxes that could provide gameplay advantages. 

"Battlefield 5" isn't making the same mistake. The long and short of it is that there will be cosmetic items available to purchase for "Battlefield 5," but they won't convey any gameplay advantages. That's a crucial difference.

Of note: Customizations can also be unlocked through simply playing the game. 

As usual for the "Battlefield" series, "Battlefield 5" is class-based.

The standard four classes are back, as seen above: Scout, Assault, Medic, and Support.

But there's one major change right off the bat to that lineup: Any member of a squad can revive other members. The medic is still the only member of the squad who can revive other members to full health, and the only member who can provide health pick-ups, but the change otherwise points to a shift toward squads in "Battlefield 5."

The series was already geared toward playing with squads — groups of four players — but, with this move, "Battlefield 5" is adding more incentive to play as a team.

• ISIS published an Arabic-language video earlier this week, luring people to help them "conquer the enemies."
• The propaganda video contained footage of various battle scenes and jihadists threatening victims.
• People noticed that it also contained a battle scene from "The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King."

The self-styled Islamic State is trying to lure people to fight for the terror group with a scene from "The Lord of the Rings."

In a propaganda video published on Tuesday, bearing the terrorist group's watermark, the group's chapter in Kirkuk, Iraq, used four seconds of footage from the trilogy to encourage followers to "conquer the enemies."

The clip was taken from the third LOTR movie, "The Return of the King." It shows the riders of Rohan charging an orc army at the Battle of The Pelennor Fields, but seems to be in the video more as a generic medieval battle scene.

Here's the scene. The part that ISIS repurposed comes around the 2 minute 30 second mark:

The ISIS video, which Business Insider has reviewed, then cuts to footage of soldiers on horseback fighting each other, with the voice of an Arabic-language narrator — which was also taken from a Hollywood movie.

That scene was from "Kingdom of Heaven," a 2005 film starring Orlando Bloom as a French blacksmith joining the Crusades to fight against Muslims for the Kingdom of Jerusalem.

The medieval scenes are spliced inbetween images of ISIS fighters in the field, and news footage showing Donald Trump and various news anchors talking about ISIS.

The terror group is fond of crusader imagery, and often frames its battle with the west as a new-age crusade. Its official communications describe routinely describes people from western nations, especially victims of terror attacks, as "crusaders."

ISIS's use of Hollywood films in Tuesday's propaganda video was first pointed out by Caleb Weiss, an analyst at the Long War Journal, on Twitter.

The Ride of the Rohirrim scene appears to be popular among jihadis. It was also used by the Turkistan Islamic Party, an extremist group founded in western China, Weiss pointed out last year.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Here's what 'Narcos' and 'Sicario' get right and wrong about drug cartels

• "Cobra Kai" creators Jon Hurwitz, Hayden Schlossberg, and Josh Heald talk about how their YouTube Red hit show got off the ground.
• It included getting multiple rights holders to agree on the project and convincing Ralph Macchio to come back and play the role that made him a star.

It was around the time filmmakers Jon Hurwitz, Hayden Schlossberg, and Josh Heald started seeing billboards of the lovable character from “Full House,” Kimmy Gibbler, around LA for the release of Netflix’s “Fuller House” series that they realized an update of “The Karate Kid” could be possible.

The three grew up on the iconic 1984 movie that follows Daniel (Ralph Macchio) overcoming the constant torment of fellow high schooler Johnny (William Zabka) by learning the ways of karate through Mr. Miyagi (Pat Morita).

The movie wasn’t just the ultimate telling of a kid overcoming a bully, but also showed the importance of respect, hard work, and a killer 1980s soundtrack.

Hurwitz, Schlossberg, and Heald were childhood friends and stayed in touch as they began careers in Hollywood. Hurwitz and Schlossberg launched the successful “Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle” franchise while Heald was the story creator and one of the screenwriters of the “Hot Tub Time Machine” franchise (the original even starred Zabka).

The idea of continuing to tell the story of the original characters from “Karate Kid” intrigued them, but with the franchise rights owned by Will Smith’s Overbrook Entertainment production company (which made a “Karate Kid” movie in 2010 starring Jaden Smith and Jackie Chan), they figured the guys behind “Harold & Kumar” and “Hot Tub Time Machine” wouldn’t get a fair shake to make a serious movie that looked at the original guys 30-plus years later.

But then streaming services began making original TV series and suddenly there was a new way of bringing back popular shows and movies that were beloved decades earlier.

“The changes and the evolution of TV led us to think it could work,” Schlossberg told Business Insider.

Two years ago, the guys decided to ditch the movie idea and seriously go for a “Karate Kid” reboot as a TV series. The result is YouTube Red’s first real hit show, “Cobra Kai,” which looks at Daniel and Johnny all grown up and living with the memories of what occurred back in high school and how it's affected them.

But the path to becoming the latest hit streaming series was a gargantuan task that included wooing the multiple rights holders and gaining the trust of Macchio, who for most of his adult life has tried to distance himself from the role that made him famous.

SEE ALSO: "Deadpool 2" screenwriters break down the movie's biggest Easter eggs and cameos

Chasing the movie rights.

The first hurdle to clear for the guys was to get the rights to “The Karate Kid.” It was not just owned by Smith’s Overbrook but also the estate of Jerry Weintraub, who produced the original movie, and the studio that released it, Sony.

Hurwitz and Schlossberg’s agent was able to get a meeting in the books with Caleeb Pinkett, head of creative at Overbrook. Now it was up to Hurwitz, Schlossberg, and Heald to shine.

“We went into that meeting thinking that we would say to him you can still have the movie universe and if Jaden wants to do another ‘Karate Kid’ feature you can still do that, but like Marvel, there’s now a TV show and the movies,” Hurwitz said.

To their shock, Pinkett didn’t need much convincing. The 40-minute pitch turned into a strategy meeting of how to get the show off the ground.

“He said he was going to talk to Jerry Weintraub’s estate,” Hurwitz said. “He was like, ‘We’re doing the show!’”

Pinkett, who has an executive producer credit on “Cobra Kai” (along with Will Smith), became the show’s champion when the project went to Sony.

“He was the one fighting the fights in our meetings,” Hurwitz said.

A big reason for that, the guys assume, is because they brought a package to Pinkett and Overbrook for “Karate Kid” that they hadn’t thought of.

“I got the vibe that there was always talks of doing a sequel but it wasn’t clear where that was,” Schlossberg said. “But TV wasn’t even thought of.”

Getting Ralph Macchio on board.

With a green light to make the show, Hurwitz, Schlossberg, and Heald then went to Zabka with the good news.

“It was just mind blowing to him,” Heald said of telling Zabka. “It took two or three times for him to understand that we were going to further the story of Johnny. He was in shock. There's not a day that's gone by that Billy hasn't thought about Johnny Lawrence because it's such an iconic role for him. The character never really left him.” 

With Zabka on board, the trio turned their attention to Macchio, which they knew right away was going to be a harder sell.

“None of us knew him but we had heard he was very hesitant to engage with anything ‘Karate Kid’ related over the years,” Heald said.

As the decades passed, “The Karate Kid” continued to grow a loyal fan base, but like many things from the 1980s, the movie became a punchline. The memorable scenes became fodder as YouTube grew in popularity and the song from the movie, “You’re the Best,” also became a staple in the comedy community. And it didn’t help that the movies made after 1986’s “The Karate Kid Part II” — “The Karate Kid Part III" (1989), “The Next Karate Kid” (1994) and Jaden Smith’s “The Karate Kid” (2010) — were nowhere as popular as the first two movies.

But Hurwitz, Schlossberg, and Heald didn’t take "no" for an answer and finally got a lunch meeting with Macchio in New York.

“And that lunch turned into a four-hour lunch where we pitched him the whole show and that we were not trying to make a ‘Harold & Kumar’ or ‘Hot Tub Time Machine’ experience with this show,” Heald said. “We told him it has this new way in because the guys are adults now. Ralph was not expecting any of that and a couple of days later we had a two-hour phone call with him, and a few days later another two-hour phone call, and by the end of that week Ralph was in.”

Looking back on the process Macchio went through with them to finally agree to do the role, they respect the time he took to finally say "yes."

“Because he knew if he came back as Daniel it would be a big deal to people, not just in this country but all over the world, and he wanted to make sure it was the right decision to do,” Hurwitz said.

“He wanted to make sure we had answers to the big questions that he had,” Schlossberg added. “He didn't want to hear, ‘That's a great question we'll figure that out.’ He wanted to make sure we thought about this beyond memorizing a pitch.”

What’s in store for season 2.

After “Cobra Kai” launched on YouTube Red in the beginning of May, the show was immediately praised by critics (it got a 100% rating on Rotten Tomatoes), and the hardcore fans, as the show reportedly performed better than many shows on Netflix and Hulu. 

The show didn’t just have strong character development for its leads Macchio and Zabka, but also introduced younger characters who are going through their own issues and will be influenced by both older characters — for better and worse.

Hurwitz, Schlossberg, and Heald say season two, which YouTube Red has already renewed, will delve deeper into all the characters. And as the last episode teased, Johnny’s old sensei, Kreese (Martin Kove), is now in the mix.

“We knew from the beginning we wanted him to be on the show but we wanted to wait for the right moment,” Hurwitz said. “There was enough story to be told in season one and we thought it would be really fun for Martin to pop up at the end and be that curve ball for season two.”

When they approached Kove, the actor was immediately into the idea and assumed he would be in the storyline right away, seeing the title of the series is named after his character's dojo. But the guys had to make him understand that it wasn’t his time yet.

“We promised him when he does show up on screen it’s a huge moment and we’ll have more to do with him in the future,” Hurwitz said.

“We have said all along that there’s really no character that’s off limits from the movies,” Schlossberg said. “But we also want to make sure we are introducing the characters the right way. We want it to feel impactful and be connected to the stories we’re telling.”

Hurwitz, Schlossberg, and Heald say season two will pick up right where season one left off and there will be new characters on the horizon, maybe even some from the old movies.

“We had a lot of thoughts about the second season before making the first,” Schlossberg said. “This is something that has a plan.”

• Actor Matthew McConaughey told Jimmy Kimmel about his experience of "being Snooped" by Snoop Dogg, when the rapper swapped prop weed for real marijuana in a scene they both appeared in for Harmony Korine's upcoming movie, "The Beach Bum."
• "We pass back and forth and all of a sudden at the end, he goes, 'Yo, Moondog — that's my character — that ain't prop weed. That's Snoop weed,'" McConaughey told Kimmel.

Actor Matthew McConaughey appeared on "Jimmy Kimmel Live!" on Wednesday and recounted his experience of "being Snooped," or unknowingly getting high, with rapper Snoop Dogg in an upcoming movie they both appear in.

McConaughey told Kimmel that his "snooping" occurred in a filmed scene of Harmony Korine's movie "The Beach Bum," when Snoop Dogg swapped McConaughey's prop weed for real marijuana.

"My snooping happened when it was a scene where I'm going to Snoop, I've got writers block, and Snoop has the magic weed, all right?" McConaughey said. 

"But I go to Snoop and I go to the prop man and make sure I've got prop weed," he continued. "Now, prop weed is not real weed. It's like crushed oregano and stuff. So we get in the scene, it's about a six-minute scene. We pass back and forth, and all of a sudden at the end, he goes, 'Yo, Moondog — that's my character — that ain't prop weed. That's Snoop weed.' And I went, 'Oh, you son of a gun.'"

The Oscar-winning actor added: "The next 9 hours were a lot of fun but I don't think we used one word in the English language."

Harmony Korine's "The Beach Bum" stars McConaughey and Snoop Dogg alongside Isla Fisher, Zac Efron, and singer Jimmy Buffett. "The Beach Bum" doesn't have a release date yet. It follows Korine's 2013 film "Spring Breakers."

Watch McConaughey's interview below:

SEE ALSO: Snoop Dogg's album cover features him standing over Trump's dead body

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: A Nobel Prize-winning economist explains what Milton Friedman got wrong