Slashdot Mirror
Disney Buys Pixar
BlueDjinn writes to tell us that it appears a great deal of speculation over Disney's buyout of Pixar Animation Studios is in fact true. From the article: "[Pixar] is set to meet tomorrow to approve the company's $7bn (£3.9bn) takeover by Disney. The all-share deal will make Steve Jobs, the chief executive of Apple, around $3.5bn and the single largest shareholder in Disney. Jobs created Pixar in 1986 when he paid $10m for the computer animations division of Lucasfilm, owned by Star Wars creator George Lucas."
Nobody deserves a few billion bucks more than he does, the way I figure it. If he manages to pull Disney out of their spiral of mediocrity, he'll have earned every penny...
Now we will see Nemo 2, Nemo 3 (dvd only release) and a Nemo tv series, with each one getting a little crappier. Same for all other Pixar films.
Disney will milk the IP till the cow dies and will probably not fund development of new IP.
1) Buy Pixar
2) Milk IP
3) Short-time profit
IAAL
It will be interesting to see to what extent Jobs tries to "bundle" products, with the new market-power. For instance, will Disney-related animation software for children be available only for the Mac platform? Will a Disney DVD be included with the future iMac mini PVR/media box/whatever? etc.
Hopefully they won't do away with that Pixar lamp, I kind liked the little guy.
x86, oh yes, I'm pro.
...tells me that pixar is for sale in 10 years for 10m.
on a sidenote, what happens to renderman?
As slashdot sees Disney as mostly evil, it should be noted that most of the sceptical activities of Disney can be attributed to one man: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Eisner.
I have a good feeling about the new CEO http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Iger
Read up on these completely different management styles and then take a look at Disney again. Iger was responsible for talks to continue with Pixar, so its no suprise that it might lead to this.
The parallels here are almost amusingly similar to when Apple bought NeXT, ten years ago. Because so much of NeXT's advanced technology essentially displaced Apple's own struggling and dated codebase for the Mac OS to become Mac OS X, and Steve Jobs' own idea of a trimmed and stylish product line replaced the beige box Power Mac (insert four-digit number here), many industry analysts joked that 'NeXT had bought Apple for negative $400 million.'
Look at what's happening now! Like NeXT, one of Steve's projects, was bought by Apple, and its technology incorporated into the company to revamp its product line, Pixar, again a project of Steve, may very well save Disney. For the purists that either hate to see Disney's long-lived traditional animation replaced by computer 3D rendering, or fear that Disney will mishandle Pixar's talent and resources and bring an unfortunate end to the latter studio's remarkably successful run of films, consider two facts: since this isn't a hostile takeover, clearly the folks in charge at Pixar, Steve Jobs included, believe that this will be as good for Pixar as it will be for Disney. They wouldn't be doing this if they thought that Disney was going to ruin them. Also consider now that Steve Jobs is the largest shareholder at Disney. That really carries some weight. Steve has a reputation for getting what he wants, and I also don't doubt that he made this deal without knowing he would have a significant say in Disney's direction.
So really, guys, calm down! Just imagine the headline read, 'Pixar buys Disney for -$7 billion.'
Take off every sig. For great justice.
Steve Jobs will begin designing rides at Disneyland. You know there will be an acid trip ride, something Alice and Wonderland style. I can't wait.
Ah, beat me to it! But let me echo it - I just have to:
Nooooooooooooooooooooo!
My son is two and a half and he's very much into animated movies. Nemo, Shrek (1+2), Toy Story (1+2), Winnie the Pooh (tons), Ice Age, Robots, etc, etc. Some of it a bit scary, so we are always by his side, so I've seen these movies a bazillion times.
The ones that last (both for us as adults and for him) are the Pixar ones. You can watch these movies again and again and they stay funny, and you can find new deepts in them. The disney ones are usually okay, but they always play the emotion card a bit heavily, which gets old really fast (dreamworks and fox is rather uneven, but usually okay, too).
TC - My Photos..
This is quite a development! I suspect that Pixar will continue to operate (largely) autonomously, but there will undoubtedly be a good deal of knowledge sharing between Disney and Pixar. John Lasseter has often expressed his admiration for Disney's animators and their pioneering role in developing the medium. While there might seem to be a lot of enmity between the two companies, I suspect there's also a lot of mutual respect between the artists at both studios.
People may not like the management decisions made by Disney (which have often dictated the direction of their films) but the company still employs a great many talented artists. And of course, Pixar continues to benefit from Disney's considerable marketing muscle - few other companies know how to so thoroughly milk their products for every cent they can get (and I don't say that as praise).
Keep in mind that the Disney empire also includes ABC, ESPN, the go.com network, as well as a bunch of movie studio (Touchstone, Miramax, Dimension) and record company imprints. Several of these operate somewhat autonomously, but Jobs will have some say in things as the single largest shareholder in Disney. Gates wants to control the living room. Jobs will control the living room.
This guy's the limit!
This deal doesn't make Jobs $3.5bn, as the article claims. It barely makes him any money at all.
Pixar's market cap is just a hair under $7bn, about half of which Jobs owns. Disney is buying all $7bn worth of Pixar stock with $7bn worth of Disney stock. So Jobs isn't making any money, he's just changing the name on part of his stock portfolio (Disney's buy is a bit above market value for Pixar, so he does make SOME money, on the order of 1% of the $3.5bn the article mentions). He's also going from being a 50% owner of a $7bn company to a 14% owner of a $50bn company.
So maybe Jobs thinks he can get in and infect Disney with Pixarness and save it. Maybe he just wants to cash out and do something else, and figures he can sell 14% of Disney a lot easier than he can sell half of Pixer. Could be he thinks Pixar will do better with Disney behind it than with Disney as an enemy. Possibly there's another explanation. Let the speculation continue - we'll know in a few years what the plan was and whether it worked or not.
High-speed Road Trip (18.000KPH)
Is Disney going to keep selling PRman and PRman for Maya plug-ins? Will Catmull continue on with them? What's this all mean for Renderman? Will the software side split off into their own business?
I should say that the golden age of CG movies are now over. Now come the crap movies...the "me too" movies.
Honestly, has anyone really seen anything coming out that even remotely looks interesting? Chicken Little(already out last year)? Ice Age 2? Cars? Open Season? Over the Hedge? Any of these really grabbing you? How about Valiant(also out I believe...or did it go straight to video)? Or The Ant Bully? These are all coming out in the next few months. Have I missed any? Oh, forgot Hoodwinked, and Monster House.
Ah, the old Hollywood adage. If you can't make a buck with quality, then make it with quantity. "Teh peoples want teh CG! We gives them teh CG!"
"Leo Fender was in a 'state of grace' when he designed the Stratocaster." -- Paul Reed Smith
If it weren't for the assholes at Disney (and the *AA), you'd already be able to have Steamboat Willie on your iPod, for free!
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Steve Jobs has little to no creative input concerning Pixar: John Lasseter is in charge. The last time Jobs tried to interfere with the filmmakers choices was just after the first private screening of a finished "Toy Story". Jobs hated the score by Randy Newman and wanted to replace it. Lasseter and the other guys stood by the Newman score and songs, which brought "Toy Story" an Oscar nomination and Newman four additional scores for Pixar. Jobs has an office at Pixar but he's never there. A documentary about the old Pixar headquarters around the "Monsters Inc." release (2001) showed an empty office with just a desk and a PC, not a Mac. Lasseter even jokes about the room, the least crowded area at Pixar. As a sidenote, this footage about the office could be seen on videos part of the original EPK: the "Monsters, Inc." DVD includes the same documentary but the footage is missing. (The explanation for the PC is that Jobs, after his return to Apple, didn't use a Mac running Mac OS 8 or 9 for himself. He still had a PC running OpenStep instead. When Mac OS X became the system of choice, he switched to the Mac.) On the other hand, Jobs plays the main part concerning business deals with Disney and other partners (Intel for the rendering part, for instance) and his input has been more than valuable to Pixar. Jobs and Pixar both run the company. If a deal is closed with Disney, Lasseter must be a part of it, because Pixar wouldn't be Pixar without him. So, I guess a term of the deal would be to grant Lasseter artistic direction of the whole departmetn. Else, there's no guarantee that Pixar future projects won't suck as much as most of Disney releases.
I don't think much of the success of Pixar is due to Steve Jobs.
Rather, the main man over there is John Lasseter, the legendary animator directly responsible for some of the companies most memorable movies. Would Pixar be anywhere today wasn't it for the brilliant movies?
Jobs is just this one guy who sees ahead better than most and invest in people who can make it happen, like Lasseter or Wozniak...
I don't feel like it...
Loaded. In his house is a giant walk in wardrobe with a long line of turtle-neck sweaters, you fight through it all and at the back is a snow filled landscape where iPods grow on trees.
You see Steve Wozniak talking to a CGI lion on the technical production of blue boxes. In the background is a giant Intel factory, where little orange men are packing new iMacs into crates marked Nigeria...
Task Mangler
What I am concerned about is how the deal will affect the Studio Ghibli/Disney distribution deal. For many years, Disney has had wide distribution rights over Ghibli works. Sometimes this has worked out for the better (the heavily promoted Spirited Away), and sometimes not so well (Miramax requested, but was denied, many edits in Princess Mononoke).
A closer connection between Pixar and Disney will probably not harm Ghibli. It was noted that John Lasseter (founder of Pixar) had given very strong support to Spirited Away, and was a key driver of what success that movie had in North America. A closer connection between Pixar and Ghibli will probably result in an even stronger benefit.
Now, on notes of pure speculation, how might the Pixar/Disney merger benefit Ghibli going forward? Could we expect Miyazaki-animated short films (currently limited in distribution to the Ghibli Museum in Mitaka City, Tokyo) put on sale on the iTunes Video Store? Or maybe distribution of older classic Ghibli films? Imaging having a copy of Gauche the Cellist on your iPod to perk you up on those cloudy days of life. Or how about strong promotion and wide distribution of the forthcoming Tales from Earthsea? With the combination of a a imaginative and sensitive director like Goro Miyazaki and effective marketing, I can't imagine how Earthsea wouldn't become a major blockbluster.
What else would you like to see come out of the Studio Ghibli/Disney/Pixar deal?
---
patiwat
Just an aside: my daughter is a bit older, and I picked up a copy of "The House at Pooh Corner" for her. It (the original book by AA Milne) was so much better than the simpering Disneyfied versions you see in hundreds of illustrated books. Easy to read, yet full of subtle humour and wordplay. This I've found is a general rule: Disney cartoons are fine, but avoid their literature; go to the source.
They don't want him to leave.
I'd be surprised if there is significant change at Pixar.
If there is, you can count in seconds how long it would take for someone to offer John Lassater an animation studio of his own. Heck, with the profits from this, Lassater can probably finance his own movie if he really wants, and he'd drag half Pixar's crew along with him.
That's why things won't change. Well, maybe they will. I'm betting everyone gets raises.
Steve Jobs is a great man, but in Pixar his primary responsibilty was negotiating great contracts. Let's hope this is another one of them.
As for Steve taking over Disney, I don't think it's impossible, but I'm hoping he keeps focus on Apple, where - as we all know - he's been doing great.
I do think Steve's likely to become an influential advisor and board member, but probably not CEO. Remember, John Lassater and friends basically ran Pixar, which is why Jobs could be CEO of two companies and preserve excellence. I don't think he could do that with Disney.
D
for particularly large values of 7.
Does this mean that Disney cartoons will only have one mouse?
;)
No, they'll still have many mice, but Mickey's red shorts will only have one button.
I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.
I think what will happen is that we will see John Lasseter take overall control of all Disney animation divisions.
This is actually a GREAT idea, because the hallmark of Pixar is the great storytelling of their movies. Lasseter could even help Disney revive traditional animation at Disney, too.
I think people forget that unlike Michael Eisner, Robert Iger tries to be as much hands off as possible, letting each Disney division run by their own managers. This means Mr. Lasseter will have free reign to rebuild Disney's animation tradition. (big thumbs up)
Walt's anti-union activities in the 30s is the stuff of evil, IMHO. His collaboration with the House Un-American Activities Committee was pretty despicable too.
One thing I'm not seeing being discussed in the press is the fact that Bill Gates and Ballmer over at Microsoft must be pissed over this. They want to take over the living room, but now Jobs is part of Disney, who owns ABC, ESPN, Miramax, etc--he IS the living room. So he's got the content, and Apple will provide the means. Microsoft's road to the living room just got even tougher.
I wonder if Ballmer will Fucking Kill (tm) Disney over this.
"Sufferin' succotash."
I hate to break it to you, but Corporations were given "personhood" (human rights) a very, VERY long time ago.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood
And Jobs did it with one thing: Quality. And Marketing. Ok, two things.
They invested a ton of effort to get an easy human computer interface, which got them the MAC. Jobs re-did that success to a degree with NeXT, which didn't pay off right away but got him even more money when NeXT becamse OSX. He bought Pixar while it was struggling, and helped drive it into one of the most creative, quality-focused entertainment companies in the world. The iPod was designed and re-designed and recieved constant feedback from Jobs himself... when was the last time you heard about Ballmer getting dirty in the trenches? Same with iTunes.
Years ago Jobs and Apple realized that quality and clarity commanded a premium, and have been working dilligently to create and milk that. MS's strategy has been to crush the competition from a business legal standpoint. The former has made Jobs and Apple welcome in new areas and businesses, while the latter leaves Microsoft having an uphill battle every time it enters a new market.
MSNBC was an interesting idea, but it didn't do anything better or more original than the competition.
I'm glad to see that sometimes quality is rewarded.
The ______ Agenda