Jump to content
  • entries
    945
  • comments
    4,956
  • views
    1,221,657

Sure... and Sony will buy Apple, too.


Guest

549 views

So the big brouhaha in the animation industry over the last couple of days is the age-old rumor of Disney planning to buy Pixar.

 

As far as I've been able to tell, all of the articles have been based around one article which originally appeared in the Wall Street Journal. What's interesting to me about all of this, is how all of these other "news" services seem to be treating this as fact. The buyout is practically a done-deal by their accounts. Although at the end of most articles, most are willing to admit that "there are other possible deals" being discussed.

 

Well, duh. :roll:

 

A little reality check is in order here.

 

First, are these talks really going on? Almost certainly. Disney would love to own Pixar outright.

 

Would Steve Jobs sell Pixar? Not likely. Unless he was getting something he wanted in return - and that's not money. It's control.

 

The rumored deal would make Jobs the single largest shareholder of Disney stock, and possibly the Chairman of Disney. But would this give him any real say in how the company would be run? Well, it'd have to, or he wouldn't take the deal.

 

Pixar is Jobs' baby (actually it's his other baby - Apple being his first). He has great disdain for Disney and the marketing-driven schlock they crank out. He also loathes the idea of Disney-created sequels of Pixar's films. He's not about to turn Pixar (and all of the creative talent that have worked so hard to make it what it is) over to Disney, unless he retains control over it.

 

But would he also want to have anything to do with the rest of the day-to-day operations of Disney? Disney is a huge company. In addition to feature animation, they make other feature films (under several studio names), TV series (animated and live action), then there are the TV networks, radio Disney, record labels, theme parks, merchandising, hotels, cruise ships, retail stores... and on and on and on. If you were already busy running Apple (which Jobs will hold onto until the day he dies), would you want to be involved in all of that other stuff, too?

 

If the deal goes through as rumored, my guess is that Steve will be given free reign over Disney Feature Animation, and put Pixar people in charge of rebuilding and running it. Pixar would remain where it is, and as it is, but Disney Feature Animation would essentially become a clone of how Pixar makes films.

 

Note that I suggested this as a possibility some months ago:

And here's a long shot (although I think it's Disney's best option):

  •  
  • Disney Feature Animation is taken over and run by Pixar, to make films for Disney as "Pixar Animation Studios, Burbank". Pixar's current studio would continue operating as-is.
     

The Burbank studio would be funded by Disney, located at Disney, making films exclusively for Disney, but Pixar would be running the productions and making the decisions.

 

There would have to be all sorts of stipulations in the contract regarding his control over the animation studio and related use of its intellectual properties, about Pixar's continued autonomy, and especially about being able to nullify the deal should Disney begin to renege on its promises.

 

All in all, I think it's probably too much for Disney to give up, in order to get Pixar back. Disney is much more likely to work out a distribution deal with Jobs instead, that would give Pixar the lion's (or mouse's) share of profits, ownership of intellectual properties, a big slice of merchandising, and maybe some sort of stock deal, where Jobs would get to sit on Disney's board and "advise" them on making animated films.

 

The deciding factor, I think, is going to be how desperate Disney is right now, and what their confidence level is in the films they've got in production. If they think it's hopeless, then they just might make Jobs the kind of deal he'd require to "sell" Pixar to them ("sell" meaning Disney would technically own it, but Jobs would still be in control of it). If they don't want to give up that kind of control, I think a Pixar-favorable distribution deal would be the end result. At this point, that's what I think is more likely. Becoming part of Disney would be more of a headache than Jobs would want to deal with. They're a giant, bloated corporation that he probably equates to a Sony or Microsoft. All business, no heart.

 

Some sort of deal will be reached, and probably soon. My guess is Disney will wait to see how Chicken Little does on DVD, but I wouldn't be surprised to see a deal before then, either.

2 Comments


Recommended Comments

He has great disdain for Disney and the marketing-driven schlock they crank out.

Maybe...but he runs Apple, right? And what have the 1500 permutations of the iPod been if not marketing-driven? :)

Link to comment
He has great disdain for Disney and the marketing-driven schlock they crank out.

Maybe...but he runs Apple, right? And what have the 1500 permutations of the iPod been if not marketing-driven? :)

 

I'm not saying he isn't a hypocrite. ;)

 

But the difference in his approach (or philosophy, if you will) to products, is that the product has to be good, first. His stubbornness on that is legendary. The umpteen-hundred iPods are certainly marketing-driven, but they're also good products. I think you could also describe the endless iPod updates as "technology-driven". Since Apple is a technology company, they have to continually update their products, to take advantage of newer technologies, lower manufacturing costs, etc. To do otherwise would be bad business.

 

The difference as far as Disney is concerned, is that they either don't care what "quality" means as it refers to feature animation, or they have simply forgotten. So their decisions are based on marketing, not quality. That's all they know, or perhaps that's all they have confidence in anymore. Steve Jobs is a quality-control-freak. The fact that iPods are selling in the gazillions is a result of that. If they weren't able to make an MP3 player the way he wanted it, the iPod wouldn't exist. So maybe they'd best be described as "ego-driven". ;)

Link to comment
Guest
Add a comment...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...