I didn't save the article, but at the beginning of negotiations, one of the studio execs basically said that the studios would lose revenue during a strike but would make money because they wouldn't have to pay writers (actors, etc.) during a stoppage. The exec contrasted the prodcos' situation with what he perceived to be the situation of striking writers--writers would lose both revenue and wealth; pressured by the need to feed and house their families, the writers would agree to a deal that would benefit the studios, which would parallel the overall outcome of the 2007 strike, when the studios seized control over streaming revenue.

I'm no expert, but it seems to me that there are two directions that the next set of negotiations will take:

(1) Reason / self-interest prevails: the AMPTP (plus streamers, in whatever conglomeration they find themselves) will realize that they would increase their profit by working with writers and actors (a small percentage of their overall costs), and everyone (including viewers) will benefit.

(2) Greed / irrationality prevails: the studios etc. will think that they can return to the glory days of outfoxing or overpowering writers and actors, and they'll try to squeeze out whatever blood they can from the turnip.

I'm more of a cynic than an idealist, so I would bet more on the second outcome, but (as a frustrated idealist), I hope that I'm wrong.