Pixar And Disney Part Ways

from the wow dept

While there were rumors a year ago that Steve Jobs was looking to get back at Michael Eisner's trashing of Apple's "Rip, Mix, Burn" campaign by signing a deal with some other studio once Pixar's deal was up, most people thought they'd patch up their differences and keep going. Looks like that's not the case. Steve Jobs announced today that talks between Pixar and Disney have broken down, and Pixar will be looking for a new movie studio to work with. This isn't such a big deal for Pixar, but could be even more trouble for Disney (who's having plenty of trouble already).


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  •  
    identicon
    LittleW0lf, Jan 29th, 2004 @ 5:31pm

    Yeah!!!

    I can once again buy Pixar movies knowing full well that I am not giving money to Disney, which IMHO is one of the worst IP Nazis out there. I liked Dreamworks because they weren't Disney, and because they made some really funny movies. I've seen Disney's, and they are funny (mostly because it is Pixar and not Disney,) but I am reluctant to spend money on the one company that I see as being the leading IP Nazi in the movie field.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Aaron, Jan 29th, 2004 @ 6:53pm

    Save Disney

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      John O'Sullivan, Jan 30th, 2004 @ 10:12am

      Re: Save Disney

      I think Disney killed the goose that laid the golden egg. We know Jobs is someone who carries grudges, but that isn't the whole story here. More significant from a business point of view was a disagreement between Pixar and Disney about what constitutes a film. The original deal was for 5 pictures. Disney argued that Toy Story 2 was not separate picture because it was a sequel. Uhhh, right. That's why I didn't have to pay to see it, because I'd already paid to see Toy Story 1. Sure thing Mr. Eisner.

      The industry rumors are that this point killed the deal. Jobs & company went so sour on Disney that Eisner would have had to pay far more than anyone else to hold on to the business. Mr. Eisner's ego being what it is, he apparently feels Disney is the primary partner in the deal, that Pixar should consider themselves lucky to enjoy Disney's patronage and that they could never do as well elsewhere. I guess we will find out.

      This could actually be the final nail in Eisner's coffin at Disney. There is a lot of unhappiness with the latter part of his rule there. Losing the one bright-light money-machine Disney has left will not sit well with the analysts and institutional investors. Had he retired five years ago, he would have joined the Pantheon as one of America's greatest-ever corporate leaders. Now it looks like he will die the death of a thousand cuts. And Mr. Jobs, as ever, will be delighted to do his part.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Frank, Jan 30th, 2004 @ 1:01pm

    No Subject Given

    Didn't Disney just recently say they're not going to produce regular animation (hand-drawn, whatever they call it?) anymore? Now they're not going to back computer animation any more either (at least through Pixar?)? What are they pinning their future hopes on, the Disneyworld in Paris?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 30th, 2004 @ 4:01pm

    No Subject Given

    Mike,

    Actually, there are some losses for Pixar, especially for control-freak Steve Jobs. From the WSJ today:

    Still, Pixar's departure offers some pluses for Disney. Since "Toy Story 2" became a smash sequel Disney has been eager to release follow-ups -- either in theaters, or direct-to-video form -- of other Pixar hits such as "Monsters, Inc." Mr. Jobs, however, steadfastly opposed such projects, contending that Pixar wanted to move forward with original material rather than dwell on past successes.

    Under the existing deal, however, Disney has the right to proceed with those sequels without Pixar's approval. It hadn't done so in the past because it was reluctant to upset Mr. Jobs, but in the wake of the current rupture, it's highly likely those projects will get the green light.

    If Pixar chooses not to co-finance those sequels, as it has the right to do, Disney stands to make more money on them than the studio would have had the partnership survived. That's a mixed blessing, analysts say, noting that Disney's animation track record of late hasn't been nearly as strong as Pixar's.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      LittleW0lf, Jan 30th, 2004 @ 5:59pm

      Re: No Subject Given

      If Pixar chooses not to co-finance those sequels, as it has the right to do, Disney stands to make more money on them than the studio would have had the partnership survived. That's a mixed blessing, analysts say, noting that Disney's animation track record of late hasn't been nearly as strong as Pixar's.

      Who else is going to do it, DreamWorks?

      I hope not.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This