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

Price

[Ours]

price of Pixar was $7.4 billion with a b dollars

Thats a lot but it may have been interesting to say it was in Disney stock.

Re:Price

[Guspaz]

I think that this may be more about gaining leverage in pushing content to iTunes. Steve Jobs is now the single largest Disney shareholder. That gives him a LOT of swing in the company. Disney also owns ABC, if I'm not mistaken. Now, if Jobs says to the board that he wants all of Disney's movies and all of ABC's shows on iTunes, he's got a lot of pull. While he might have been able to convince them before when he didn't own a huge chunk of Disney, now that he does own a hefty chunk of the company any such move is almost certain to succeed.

Nice deal

[mwvdlee]

I think the devil made a nice deal; only $7.4 billion for a prime quality soul.

Re:Nice deal

[Urkki]

So, what's so evil about Disney again? I mean, other than the whole no-pants thing corrupting minds of youngsters, and the various "Donald Duck"-parties that have been inspired by this...

I guess I could google for the evilness of Disney, but you should never trust the Internet so I'd rather read about it here on peer-reviewed slashdot.

Re:Nice deal

[thesandtiger]

So, what's so evil about Disney again?

That they're one of the key corporations behind the ever increasing extensions of copyright duration would be the biggie for me.

Granted, if it weren't them, someone else would do it, but they did do it. So meh.

Re:Nice deal

[soft_guy]

The fact that they are hypocrtical. First, they used stories from the public domain to build their empire. Then they use their money and power to bribe congress to extend copyright from the original 14 years to be basically infinite. Thus, no material can ever enter the public domain again.

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

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

[node 3]

In the early 80's, Disney was severely in danger of fading away. Eisner not only saved Disney financially, but built it into the huge, powerful media corporation it is today. However, it's not all roses. As you noted, "Disney is a supertanker of a company" that "exploit[s] its brand[s] on ... third-rate tat."

Disney's new CEO, Robert Iger, has impressed Steve Jobs enough to make this deal possible. Jobs is the type of person who wants to make [insanely] great things, and he wouldn't send one of his greatest creations into the maws of mediocrity. If you recall, it was recent that Jobs was ready to leave Disney in a very public row between Jobs and Eisner.

I fully expect the Pixar acquisition will make Disney better far more than it will make Pixar worse. I also suspect that under Iger, Disney will be vastly different from the Disney your post describes. How Disney's new CEO fares has yet to be decided, but the prognosis is positive, especially if Steve is willing to trust one of his three greatest creations to him.

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

[tpgp]

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?

Sorry, I meant to say:

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

See - sony no longer fits the description ;-)

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.

In the best of all worlds,

[ameline]

This will be similar to Apple buying Next. In the end, all the senior people of Next wound up running Apple -- Apple adopted NextStep as their OS, and called it OSX.

With any luck, Jobs, Lasseter, and other senior Pixar people will wind up running Disney. It would be a substantial improvement.

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)

Re:Not hard to see why....

[david.given]

The Emperor's New Groove (2000) $89

Damn. There's no justice. That film is great, and completely blows away most of their other recent films for sheer style, verve and originality --- I reckon it's better than The Lion King, which suffered rather from the Disney over-earnestness.

Treasure Planet (2002) $38

That one's a real pity. Everything about it was so good --- the animation, the concept, the style, the characterisation, the acting --- except for the actual plot. If only they'd stuck to the original Stephenson novel instead of going off into la-la land with space portals and huge explosions and crap like that, this could have been good. The first half --- up until whatshisname gets pushed overboard by Silver --- is well worth watching.

Home on the Range (2004) $50

I've never even heard of this one. That's how much Disney's impacted me recently...

Plan for Profit!

[wbren]

1. Buy Pixar for $10 million
2. Build it into a great animation studio
3. Sell yourself to the devil (Mickey Mouse)
4. Personal profit of $3.5 million!

Great work, Steve Jobs! See, this time I didn't even need to include the mysterious "..." step. Amazing!

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

does this mean we'll see Pixar's TRON 2?

[boxlight]

I wonder if this means we'll see that remake of (Disney's) TRON that John Lasseter wanted to make?

Cool!

boxlight

Apple computer on the phone for you Mr. Jobs.

[mrshowtime]

Jobs should have waited a few more years and maybe could have acquired Disney :) However, I seriously doubt Jobs will let any of the idiots running Disney or any "middle management" types even on Pixar's Holy Ground, let alone put -any- suggestions on anything creatively. Why attempt to break what is "money in the bank" for Disney by letter Pixar do what Pixar does best. Remember, Jobs is now "Mr. Disney" he owns the most stock out of any shareholders and is on the board of directors. Do not be surprised if you do not see Jobs as CEO in a few years of Disney. Apple who?

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.

Does this mean...

[PurpleButter]

Does this mean that Mickey Mouse will now only have 1 button?

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:Disney has no influence over Pixar?

[Anim8me2]

SO, you are right in the abstract but you are missing the details.

Disney makes most of that money in marketing and licensing. NOT from box office.

in this case Disney has final say like a hen-pecked husband has final say in his house... "Yes dear, whatever you say." The fact that Jobs has no creative input is moot, what he does have is a seat on the board and controlling interest. As such if Lasseter and Catmull call him up and say they need his backing on an issue, he will do it. He is very aware of what makes Pixar great.

You seem to think that Disney just snapped their fingers and created a CG division. Actually what they did was consolidate their assets from several location (Orlando, LA, New York). Remember there were at the very least 400 animators/modelers/TDs working on "Dinosaur" and many of them remained or were hired back over the years. 2 years is about right for a studio to produce a CG feature. Pixar has that number cut down and Animal Logic are trying to do it in 9 months for "Happy Feet", but the idea is the same. The pipelines have been in place for a while so this is no great feat.

Will we see more marketing of Pixar movies (toys, games, etc.)... sure. That is one of Disney's strengths right now. That doesn't make them bad. THey are just leveraging their content in the only way they know. That will even out over time as the Pixar mentality spreads to the right people at Disney.

Lasseter is in charge of story, so don't expect a slew of sequels. DO watch for a live action feature written and directed by Brad Bird. And ya know what... it will kick ass!