Robert Iger to be named Eisners replacement to CEO position today...

Disney needs Pixar more than Pixar needs Disney

From the looks of the garbage Disney has been putting out over the past couple of years....I would say that they desperately need Pixar.

Computer Magic said:

I agree the current terms on the table is not a good business deal for Disney. Hopefully that was just Pixar taking a stab at Eisner.

Hopefully both companies can come back to the table, heal wounds and work out a deal to help both companies.

They still need each other.

Click to expand...

I disagree....except I think Pixar needs a major studio to help market and distribute.

By WDC keeping Pixar around, they are having to produce less animated films.....as they can release a Pixar film, instead of their own.

If Pixar leaves and becomes a competitor, not only does WDC have to replace that revenue, but, as competition breeds innovation, they will not be able to release a crappy film and expect it to do well.

Pixar going away will mean that WDC will have to get better.

(and, I think Iger's comments on the subject were influenced by Eisner....when he is gone, Iger may be able to speak his mind.)

There are two positive elements from articles posted here that I'd like to point out.

First, looks like Eisner is leaving for good with this announcement:

Quote from ABCNEWS: In a letter to the board Sunday, Eisner praised the decision and said he will not ask to be nominated for another term on the board when his current term expires next year. Eisner also said he will not seek the board chairmanship after Mitchell retires

Eisner may have made a different decision had Iger not been chosen.

Second, Harvey Weinsten, head of Miramax, who has gone head to head with Eisner leading to the severing of ties between Weinsten and Disney touts Iger's choice as "terrific".

Quote from ABCNEWS article: I've had a great working relationship with Bob Iger and think he's a terrific choice," Weinstein said.

So it is possible Iger can reconcile some of the working relationships Disney once had been Eisner drove away.

Besides the argument that he's too close to Eisner and the personal hatred of Eisner wearing off onto Iger, I haven't seen what makes Iger such an irrehensible choice (or worse than say Whitman from E-bay that withdrew her name earlier this week). I'm not sure either if a "fresh" start as Roy Disney and Stanely Gold have asserted is necessarily the best way. That could lead to great things, but also had an equal chance of leading to awful things for the company (I personally don't have much respect for Roy or Stanely anymore since the SaveDisney campaign went from what appeared to be a heart-felt attempt to revitalize Disney that captured my interest to a campaign that turned out to appear to be about a personal vindetta against Eisner) Can anyone help me understand why Iger's so terrible?

CTXRover said:

Can anyone help me understand why he's so terrible?

Click to expand...

No......it does not look that way....at the very least, nobody has been able to come to the table with anything logical.

speck76 said:

I disagree....except I think Pixar needs a major studio to help market and distribute.

By WDC keeping Pixar around, they are having to produce less animated films.....as they can release a Pixar film, instead of their own.

If Pixar leaves and becomes a competitor, not only does WDC haveto replace that revenue, but, as competition breeds innovation, they will not be able to release a crappy film and expect it to do well.

Pixar going away will mean that WDC will have to get better.

9and, I think Iger's comments on the subject were influenced by Eisner....when he is gone, Iger may be able to speak his mind.)

Click to expand...

If Disney can become a competitor. Right now Disney is no where near Pixar. That is way they need the deal. But with so many companies entering the Pixar like animated films there is a possibility of over saturating the market of aminated films. Will Disney be the one on top if that happens? I don't know. That is where Iger comes into play.

Computer Magic said:

If Disney can become a competitor. Right now Disney is no where near Pixar. That is way they need the deal. But with so many companies entering the Pixar like animated films there is a possibility of over saturating the market of aminated films. Will Disney be the one on top if that happens? I don't know. That is where Iger comes into play.

Click to expand...

You are right......if you look back in the Animation forum, I psoted an article (from WSJ I think) that was talking about how the CGI-animated film genre is becoming saturated, and that eventually, some will fail.

Failure is good sometimes.

Pixar has not failed yet, but they also have never really had any competition. The animation on the new Robots film looks good, which shows that the competition is getting closer to Pixar. Shrek 1 & 2, Shark Tale, and Ice Age have shown that companies other than Pixar can make a CGI blockbuster film.

No CGI-animated film has failed yet, but eventually, one will.....and I can not wait to see who it is.

CTXRover said:

Second, Harvey Weinsten, head of Miramax, who has gone head to head with Eisner leading to the severing of ties between Weinsten and Disney touts Iger's choice as "terrific".

Quote from ABCNEWS article: I've had a great working relationship with Bob Iger and think he's a terrific choice," Weinstein said.

So it is possible Iger can reconcile some of the working relationships Disney once had been Eisner drove away.

Besides the argument that he's too close to Eisner and the personal hatred of Eisner wearing off onto Iger, I haven't seen what makes Iger such an irrehensible choice (or worse than say Whitman from E-bay that withdrew her name earlier this week) Can anyone help me understand why he's so terrible?

Click to expand...

This is also one of Iger's challenges, mend relationship Eisner has been involved in. Iger will need to show he is independent of Eisner for that trust factor to return. I have not seen why he is terrible, people may be worried his is a puppet of Eisner. IF that holds untrue, he will earn respect. I think people are concerned that internel means no change, which is not always true.

speck76 said:

Pixar going away will mean that WDC will have to get better.

Click to expand...

Disney already tried doing a CGI film....Dinosaur....a so-so film that made $10 million more than its production budget. If Chicken Little fails in November (which many predict will happen), they will have to get Pixar back.

I won't hold my breath with the new guy, but I won't be bashing him until I see the decisions he makes.

NemoRocks said:

Disney already tried doing a CGI film....Dinosaur....a so-so film that made $10 million more than its production budget. If Chicken Little fails in November (which many predict will happen), they will have to get Pixar back.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't lump Dinosaur into the CG animated flick category quite yet. Story, story, story is the main thing that makes a film. The pre-shooting of live shots for the background lead to a lot of story constraints (inability to go back and re-do certain segments) and greater concentration on the wizadry of the whole thing than the story of the whole thing. I also don't know if a failure of CL means the end of Disney animation either. I'm willing to give them a second chance. At the very least, American Dog from Chris Sanders looks interesting. The interest in Chicken Little that I've heard from kids that see his pic on the WDW buses does make me wonder though why some assume CL will fail (honestly, this is the first I've heard that). Early previews seen by some and reported on Dark Horizons or some other movie page garnered some pretty good reception not too long ago as well.

There is some truth to Disney relying on Pixar too much. Without them in the wing to save Disney's animation image, they will HAVE to do better, they have no other choice.

Umm... well, let's wait and see what the future holds. But I am very upset.

speck76 said:

I can tell you that I think Chicken Little will do very well this summer, as so many people here can relate to that character.

THE SKY IS NOT FALLING!

Iger has never been in the CEO postion for WDC before, therefore, we really have no idea whatsoever of what he can do with that postion.

I think the most important move he can make is hiring a great number 2 person. Eisner was admired when he had Wells......the same can not be said for when he had Pressler.

Click to expand...

Besides the fact that Chicken Little is coming out in November, I completely agree.

Disney needs Pixar more than Pixar needs Disney

Click to expand...

That is a completely wrong fact. Pixar needs Disney. No other studio has the marketing power Disney has. Besides excellent marketing arm, Disney also has the sources--ABC, Disney World, ESPN, ~4 cable nets, much more. The fact is that Pixar wanted a completely unfair deal. Disney would get about 5%. I did some calculations a while ago and it would take (i think) 15 films for them to make the same money Disney would make with just Incredibles & Cars in the current deal (assuming all films made $300m). Pixar is not god, they will not make hits forever. Pixar is new so 5/5 isn't as impressive as Disney's hits. Pixar has a lot of CG competition now. Fox films are making lots of money, Shrek 2 nearly made double what Incredibles made.

Dinosaur was not a CG film. True, the characters were cg but the backgrounds were all filmed. Also, Dinosaur was a serious film. I really look foward to CL, American Dog, Wilbur, and Repunzel. They all look great.

-Michael

He will not seek the charimanship. Note he did NOT say he would not accept it if it was offered to him. He just wasn't going to (openly, anyway) got after it. Which is problem number one - becuase by putting Iger in command he is seriously increasing his chances of getting that.

But the real issue is the fact the Iger is part of the problem. The real problem at Disney now isn't one person - it is a corporate environment of back stabbing, competition, scandal, and brown-nosing. Creativity and values are bradished about like sales pitches - there is no strong belief in them nor is there a real sense of direction or of value in the company. Iger, if you have read books like DisneyWar and Keys to the Kingdom, is a big player in many of these things. He has little real track record with reliable creative hits, and he is already showing bad interpersonal skills.

Everyone claims that Wells was the what made Eisner work, but in fact all he really did was to buffer Eisner from the rest of the company because he was the one person who stood a chance against him. Much of the real succes of the early years of the new company were more to do with there being such untapped potential in the old company. Now that that has dried up we are seeing that successes are more flukes than actuall aility.

Disney WAS taken over. In the 80's, when Eisner and the Basses got involved, along with Roy, they esentially kicked out the old management and brought in themselves. They bought up the stock - it was a takeover. Friendly (somewhat) but a takeover none the less. And quite frankly, that is what is needed now. Disney needs to be bought out, and the current managment and board completely wiped out. And then spun off (with the parks/travel, animation, merchandise, Disney pictures and touchstone, and the Disney cable channels only) and given a new management and new lease on life. Just like the parks need to change, so doesn't the company.

askmike1 said:

That is a completely wrong fact. Pixar needs Disney. No other studio has the marketing power Disney has. Besides excellent marketing arm, Disney also has the sources--ABC, Disney World, ESPN, ~4 cable nets, much more. The fact is that Pixar wanted a completely unfair deal. Disney would get about 5%. I did some calculations a while ago and it would take (i think) 15 films for them to make the same money Disney would make with just Incredibles & Cars in the current deal (assuming all films made $300m). Pixar is not god, they will not make hits forever. Pixar is new so 5/5 isn't as impressive as Disney's hits. Pixar has a lot of CG competition now. Fox films are making lots of money, Shrek 2 nearly made double what Incredibles made.

Click to expand...

Pixar needs no one. I suppose you think that their current deal is fair to Pixar, where Disney owns all characters/merchandising/50% profits in return for financing film development and marketing? I would venture to guess that Disney has made billions off of Pixar. A deal fair to both parties would be best, obviously. But both sides disagree with what's "fair". Shrek was a fluke for Dreamworks. Shark Tale sucked (Nemo rip-off). As far as animation goes right now, Pixar is the gold standard, and has been for years.

HauntedPirate said:

Shrek was a fluke for Dreamworks.

Click to expand...

Two out of the top three highest grossing computer animated films (including the third highest grossing film of ALL TIME!) would be considered flukes? You have to be kidding me.

Shark Tale sucked (Nemo rip-off).

Click to expand...

First of all, IT IS NOT A RIPOFF OF FINDING NEMO! Shark Tale was in production long before Nemo was.

And no, Shark Tale did not suck.

While I don't agree with the choice of Iger, we all know there is work to be done in the company: Strengthen relationships, develop better ideas with the necessary funds, and keep the current show on the road. If there is some way Iger can organize things with the people below him then I can say his term will be successful.

And about the Pixar thing: At this point, Pixar is a household name now. I don't think they need the marketing power of Disney per say.

maxime29 said:

And about the Pixar thing: At this point, Pixar is a household name now. I don't think they need the marketing power of Disney per say.

Click to expand...

The only thing Pixar really needs is a movie distribution channel.......but Universal, Dreamworks, Warner Bros, and Fox are all pretty much equal is Disney in that aspect.

two things...

first, I want to say that I'm not against Iger, I'm against the process that was used to choose him. There doesn't appear to be a real search for a new CEO. the board gave in once more to Eisner's wishes. Sure, Iger is an insider and knows the brand, product and people, but that could be worse than new insights and a new approach.

second, Eisner is not gone. A few have mentioned that "now that Eisner is gone" Iger may be let loose to do good things. Well, Eisner is still on the board and his puppets are still there. He will still have major pull on what happens in the company and the decisions that are made. Whether he says that he will not go after the chaimen position, there's a good chance that he wants to stay on the board. This means that any constraints that MAY have been on Iger while he was president would still be there after he's CEO.

Iger blew things at ABC. I'm not sure he's capable of running Disney unless he surrounds himself with good people. While Eisner is in the picture, that may not be possible.

Do you know why all these studios (including Pixar) are popular, it's because the kids (and most adults) think it is Disney. I've heard way too many times, "Yeah, that Disney movie, uh, Shrek 2 was great" It is the Disney name that is helping these studios.