Pixar Eaten by Mickey Mouse

The rumors went flying this weekend, but Dekortage writes "It is official: Pixar has been sold to Disney. Steve Jobs will join the Disney board, and John Lasseter is now Disney's Chief Creative Officer. So, dear Slashdot, does this mean that Disney's movies will improve, or that Pixar's will become worse?" Also the price of Pixar was $7.4 billion with a b dollars.

Comments

Don't kid yourselves

[nagora]

Disney is a supertanker of a company and it'll take more than a seat on the board or even being nominally in charge of animation to turn it around from the pile of crap it has become. Pixar is dead, for all serious purposes, although I'm sure Disney will make a big deal out of exploiting its "brand" on more of its third-rate tat.

TWW

Re:Don't kid yourselves

[tpgp]

Disney is a supertanker of a company and it'll take more than a seat on the board or even being nominally in charge of animation to turn it around from the pile of crap it has become.

Kinda reminds of Michael Dell saying (about Apple) "What would I do? I'd shut it down and give the money back to the shareholders"

I think if anyone can turn around disney, then Lasseter with Steve Jobs backing will be the ones to do it.

What I think we should be more worried about is the creation of the most vertically integrated entertainment duopoly since paramount case of 1948 broke up the old vertical monopolists.

I mean we're going to have one guy (Jobs) essentially controlling two companies that will between them produce the content, the distribution network, the playback codec and the playback device.

The potential for abuse is frightening

Re:Don't kid yourselves

[squiggleslash]

I'm pretty sure people said the same of Apple before the NeXT people took over (that was carefully worded and I'm still sure someone's going to point out Apple bought NeXT - yes, they did, but NeXT's people took over Apple, I mean, they became the senior people and stuff.) Right now, with John Lasseter being Disney's Chief Creative Officer, and Jobs both on the board and being Disney's largest shareholder, it looks like, at least nominally, a replay.

Now, that said, there are differences, chief among them being that neither Jobs nor Lasseter is a former CEO of Disney, and as such are not necessarily as familiar with the culture and market as Jobs was with Apple.

Disney, like Apple in the mid-nineties, has lost its way. For the past 30 years, it's not really had any significant direction, and has concentrated largely on media takeovers and lobbying for copyright extentions to protect Mickey Mouse, arguably a brand that has fizzled out anyway over the last decade. There's still a lot of good coming out of it, clearly there are good people in parts that are trying to find good things and pump Disney money into them, whether it's Pixar or Miramax (Pulp Fiction.) While I'm not necessarily going to argue that Jobs or Lasseter are the right people for the job, it certainly needs a fresh approach, and Jobs and Lasseter may, ultimately, be the right people to do that.

Re:Don't kid yourselves

[Dan East]

I mean we're going to have one guy (Jobs) essentially controlling two companies that will between them produce the content, the distribution network, the playback codec and the playback device.

Are you talking about Sony?

Dan East

Re:Don't kid yourselves

[Doctor Faustus]

I'm pretty sure people said the same of Apple before the NeXT people took over... I'm still sure someone's going to point out Apple bought NeXT - yes, they did, but NeXT's people took over Apple

The usual way to word that around here is that NeXT bought Apple for $-400 million. Alas, I didn't come up with that, but it's very apt.

Re:Don't kid yourselves

[wootest]

I mean we're going to have one guy (Jobs) essentially controlling two companies that will between them produce the content, the distribution network, the playback codec and the playback device.

The only playback codecs Apple make that are somewhat relevant to this is Pixlet and Apple Lossless, and both are high-quality codecs that might make sense inside the studios but will never be used to encode any content distributed by the network to the playback device.

The FairPlay DRM, however, is proprietary, but that's not a codec. And both H.264 and AAC are supported parts of the independent MPEG-4 standard. Nice try though.

(And again, like someone else said, "You mean, like Sony?")

More Like Pixar Took Over Disney

[Anonymous Coward]

Lassiter is now Chief Creative Officer of the animation studios, as well as Principal Creative Advisor at Walt Disney Imagineering. Pixar president Ed Catmull is now president of the new combined Pixar/Disney animation studios. And as much as I dislike Technomessiah Steve, I would love to see him take over the creative vision aspect of the theme parks.

iTunes

[Peter Bonte]

I'm wondering what the Disney/Pixar - Apple relation is going to work out. iTunes is selling Disney material now so apparently there is some cooperation.

Either which way

[TehBlahhh]

I think it is too early to draw any conclusions from this deal. It could still go any which way - better films, worse films, more web X.0 content, more DRM, and so on and on. I'd say we need about half a year before any 'conclusion' on this deal is more then mere speculation.

With that in mind, allow me to say: WOHOO! all the backlog of (quality) disney movies on my ipod!

Not hard to see why....

[FalconZero]

...from the box office totals (in millions of US dollars)

Pixar

• Toy Story (1995) $191
• Bugs Life (1998) $162
• Toy Story2 (1999) $245
• Monsters, Inc (2001) $255
• Finding Nemo (2003) $339
• Incredibles (2004) $261

Disney

• Aladdin (1992) $217
• The Lion King (1994) $312
• Pocahontas (1995) $141
• Hunchback of Notre Dame (1996) $100
• Hercules (1997) $99
• Mulan (1998) $120
• Tarzan (1999) $171
• The Emperor's New Groove (2000) $89
• Atlantis (2001) $84
• Lilo & Stitch (2002) $145
• Treasure Planet (2002) $38
• Brother Bear (2003) $85
• Home on the Range (2004) $50

Can you guys spot the trend too?

(Data from Wikipedia/www.boxofficemojo.com)

Toy Story 3 and history of Pixar

[boxlight]

does this mean that Disney's movies will improve, or that Pixar's will become worse?

Disney owned all the sequel rights to Pixar movies, so a few months back Disney was saying they were going to do Toy Story 3 without Pixar. If that'd happened it would've produced a better Disney movie, but a worse Pixar movie -- if you follow me.

Despite popular fanboy and media opinion, John Lasseter is the mind behind the success of Pixar's movies. Steve Jobs is the owner, distribution negotiator, but Lasseter is the talent.

BTW, there's a great chapter in THE SECOND COMING OF STEVE JOBS about the history of Pixar. Check it out.

boxlight

Hi! I am an animator. I am a millionaire.

[Shihar]

Guys, what happened is GOOD. Disney just made anyone holding stock in Pixar a millionaire. I once consulted at a company where this has happened. You pull up into the parking lot and no one has a car worth under $40,000. Everyone shows up to work because they want to and like working there, not for the salary. If the company goes down the shitter, they just leave.

IP and equipment didn't make Pixar great. The people made Pixar great. If Disney fucks it up, everyone just ups, leaves, and forms a new company leaving Disney with nothing but a name. Disney shelled out a few billion for the SHOT at using Pixar to do something good. If they blow it, the real 'assets' of Pixar can simply leave and go make another few million each.

I saw good for Pixar. Way to make yourself horrifically rich and still leave a dozen escape hatches to bail from Disney. Those people deserved a big steaming pile of money. I hope they go out and enjoy it.

Re:Now is the time

[Stan Vassilev]

"It's hard to judge a movie by it's trailers, but if Cars turns out to be as awful as it looks, Pixar is going to crash and burn when it's released. Best to sell now while Pixar's reputation is still riding high."

This happens almost before every Pixar feature. Examples.

Finding Nemo? A story about fish? WTF can't they animate stuff with legs anymore, this is going to be so lame, omg Pixar is ruined. Results: critical acclaim and great box office, awards, great public perception.

Incredibles? Omg those are so stylised, nothing creative about it, some story with CG humans. It looks so lame, omg Pixar is ruined. Results: critical acclaim and great box office, awards, great public perception.

Now it's happening to cars. But all those who are trolling on the teaser trailer will be in for a surprise. Pixar isn't randomly greenlighting movie screenplays based on explosion/boob ratio.

I'm sure it's gonna be a great movie and I'm looking forward to it.

How does it work?

[ceeam]

7-odd billion dollars. Let's suppose that Pixar employees work for peanuts and every movie is a hit and they net $200mil with each one (I'm generous today). That would take 35+ titles to bring those 7-odd billions back. Seems unlikely. OTOH - maybe Disney _needs_ something to prevent their image going _completely_ through the floor... They need someone to go to Disneylands, for example, etc... Still... Looks like a bubble.

Re:How does it work?

[WebGangsta]

7-odd billion dollars. Let's suppose that Pixar employees work for peanuts and every movie is a hit and they net $200mil with each one.

Even if you go with $200m, you're still forgetting a few things:

(a) you're talking about US box office numbers, not international [see the box office breakdown here]. International BO numbers will bring that figure way up.

(b) DVD sales, licensed merchandise (plush, books, lunchboxes, tshirts, etc), and theme park attractions will all contribute to the bottom line on top of the BO numbers.

(c) Pixar was sitting on $1b in cash themselves, so the stock swap actually netted Disney a little bit of cash, making the quoted $7.4b number a bit of a misnomer.

Re:Isn't it the other way around?

[csoto]

Exactly my thoughts. Basically, Disney Animation is gone. It has been replaced in whole by Pixar, which isn't altogether a terrible thing. I mean, Disney couldn't milk the Lion King forever, and they had no new ideas.

I don't think Jobs would have agreed to this if he wasn't sure the talent were also coming along. He did the same with Apple - he brought Avie and gave Ive the carte blanche he required. If Jobs cares about Pixar, and my understanding is, he does, then there's little to worry about. Lasseter is the creative force behind Pixar, and not only will he be in charge of Disney's animation vision, but they're putting him in charge of theme parks, consumer goods and even their broadway stuff. That's a massive shift in power, and it's long overdue.

Good for Pixar, Good for Disney

[WebGangsta]

I read most of the comments for this article posted so far, and everyone seemed to be miss the important part of the story, because it's not all about Jobs:

John Lasseter is now Disney's Chief Creative Officer, working with the animators at Disney and Pixar as well as leading the Imagineers in designing and revamping attractions for the theme parks. Also, the current President of Pixar, Ed Catmull, is now the head of all Disney Animation.

All the news reports I've seen have said that Iger and Jobs main concern was keeping Pixar as intact and independent as possible. Lasseter is under contract until 2011, and is well respected in the animation field for his passion for storytelling and perfection. When asked about whether traditional 2D animation would be restored, John didn't rule it out.

Read the LA Times article about John for more insight.

With Ed and John running all animation at Disney, and Jobs sitting on the board to help them from the top, where's the possible downside?

Re:Hi! I am an animator. I am a millionaire.

[Apotsy]

Uh, they only paid a few % over the current trading value of Pixar's stock. In order to have been made a millionaire by this deal, you would have already had to have owned a million dollars worth of Pixar stock, or close to it.

Pixar stock did go up a double digit percentage over the past few months on speculation that this would happen, but that's still not going to make anyone rich unless they were already.

Re:Nice deal

[Pieroxy]

The problem with Disney, is that they made most of their early money out of public domain stuff. Yet, this stuff would not have been in the public domain if the copyright extensions had been active then.

So on one end they should protect their interests... And on the other, according to their own views of copyright, they stole it all.

Go figure...
--
Krazy Kat