Well, I was under the impression that until the entered the "Feature Film Agreement" with Disney back in 1991, Pixar was pretty much only known for their work in commercials and for the licensing of their Renderman software. The original contract under which Toy Story was made was for a total of 3 films although only one of those 3 was ever made. It was in 1992, because of the Disney deal, that Pixar began putting more focus on products with content, such as films. That original agreement was superseded in 1997 when Pixar signed into a new "Co-Production Agreement" with Disney for a total of 5 new films (incidentally, this new contract gave them much more control over new films such as partial rights to the characters as well as a better financial stake in the profits) Toy Story 2 was not included in the new 5 film agreement with Disney because under the previous agreement, all sequels to the original Toy Story as well as all merchandising rights, fell under the original contract. As I have said before, this is a real hot spot right now with Disney and Pixar because they both want to do a part 3 to that series but Disney says it would have to be under the original contract and Pixar says they won't do it that way. Disney has the right to make part 3 on their own because they have total ownership of the characters but such a move is not likely - at least not in the near future. Under the new 5 film contract two movies, A Bugs Life and Monsters Inc. have been released. Still in the works are Film Five as well as 3 two other movies that I don't think they have yet released the names of. They are scheduled to release one a year through 2004 which will be the end of their current agreement with Disney. At that point it's anybody's guess what will happen. There was a question about weather or not Pixar could go it alone. Disney has been a major financier both with research and development as well as production of all of the feature films. Since each one is surpassing the financial records set by it's predecessor, Pixar could probably sack away enough of their money to produce one on their own in 4 years. The only question really is if they will be able to promote it. Part of the reason that Monsters Inc. is doing so well is because Disney has been promoting the hell out of it for over a year. The theater near me has had window clings and cardboard stand-ups and other such items in their lobby for months promoting this movie. Yes, there was stuff up about it even when Shrek was in theaters. They have a deal with Mc Donald's and tons of toys and lets not forget that they were selling Halloween costumes of the two main characters over a month before the movie even came out. Can Pixar generate the kind of exposure that Disney can on their own? The answer to that would be no. Almost nobody can besides Disney and maybe one or two other companies on earth. Pixar could go it alone. They might even be able to make more money on their own but if they do it will be at the cost of a higher total box office draw. Even though they don't make the movies, Disney brings a lot to the table and if it weren't for Disney, Pixar would probably still be animating Mouthwash bottles and selling software. Their relationship with Disney still accounts for about 92% of their total income each year. It's sort of symbiotic and anytime you have a symbiotic relationship and the two are separated, both suffer. The next three films are going to bring Disney and Pixar even closer. I think that if Pixar were to release a feature film without Disney and they were able to get it into major theatres on their own, many would still think it was a Disney movie.