-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Pixar Ending Talks With Disney!
- Thread starter brian_gaudio
- Start date
prisoner
New Member
Originally posted by General Grizz
Disney is concentrating on their on 3-D animation.
You know, ditch Pixar before they try it out.
Now now... lets be fair. They did try to get into
computer animation first.
Remember Dinosaur? Remember what happened to that entire department when it was a flop?
garyhoov
Trophy Husband
What's really short-sighted is the failure to recognize that Pixar is more valuable to Disney than any other company. What's the value of having Pixar characters in the parks? What's the value of attractions like "It's Tough to be a Bug"? What's the value of the giant Buzz Lightyear overlooking All Star Movies? What's the value of being associated with some of the best family films in recent memory?
If I was Eisner, I'd be willing to go as far as giving up all box office revenues as long as I could maintain licensing rights and the connection to a company that produces such fantastic work. The image of Pixar, much more than the direct revenue, is what's important to Disney in my opinion.
If I was Eisner, I'd be willing to go as far as giving up all box office revenues as long as I could maintain licensing rights and the connection to a company that produces such fantastic work. The image of Pixar, much more than the direct revenue, is what's important to Disney in my opinion.
Shaman
Well-Known Member
Yup, I agree; a connection with Pixar is very fruitful, but I also think that Disney was taking advantage of Pixar with the contract they signed some time ago....it was fairly obvious that Eisner wasn't going to be able to do that same, this time around...so being the short-sighted, visionless master and commander of the company that we know he IS, he gave them an offer they COULD refuse...go figure....good goin' mike!
On another note, here are some other interesting links to upcoming movies:
http://movies.yahoo.com/upcoming/bydistrib/disney/
Also, goodbye Pixar, HELLO Vanguard Animation:
http://movies.yahoo.com/shop?d=hp&cf=prev&id=1808470369
mac388
New Member
I think that this all shows how money oriented Eisner and Co. is. It makes more money (I guess...) to put out all of these cheap sequels, since you make more of a profit. However, I'm surprised at his short term memory---the reason that Lion King and Little Mermaid were so great was because TIME and MONEY were both on their side.
Although, I seem to remember Eisner getting heat after Aladdin for not paying Robin Williams a decent amount, to which WIlliams responded "I wanted to do a movie for my kids." Guess the symptoms of cheapness were there from the beginning.....
I have to admit though, I have no idea what would happen next. I am curious to see who would take over. Who can we trust?
Although, I seem to remember Eisner getting heat after Aladdin for not paying Robin Williams a decent amount, to which WIlliams responded "I wanted to do a movie for my kids." Guess the symptoms of cheapness were there from the beginning.....
I have to admit though, I have no idea what would happen next. I am curious to see who would take over. Who can we trust?
General Grizz
New Member
I did not make that list up.
Go to the Disney releases thread in Movie animation, and you'll see that Disney is releasing a range of 35-60 DVDs in 2004.
Go to the Disney releases thread in Movie animation, and you'll see that Disney is releasing a range of 35-60 DVDs in 2004.
MKCustodial
Well-Known Member
Can't believe they're doing the Love Bug 1 part 3... Wasn't the second one, with Dark Herbie, and the "origin story", bad enough?
wdwmaniac
Member
I agree with you guys that Eisner needs to be removed, but the PIXAR deal might have been a good thing.
No one really knowns the full extent of the terms. PIXAR may have wanted to much. Is it really worht Disney's time to only get a 10% dist. rights?
For Nemo:
USA B.O.- $304 Million
Disney got half- $152 Milion
Under say a new 10% contract- $30.4 Million.
It's not that much. Also rumors that PIXAR would keep Copyrights which would limit Disney's ability to make profits off of other things. Lastly, Disney still has 2 more PIXAR movies and PIXAR won't be releasing anything soon earliest 2007. In a market that's getting many more hands in it I think that maybe Eisner has made the right decision.
Maybe now PIXAR's done Disney should go buy Jim Henson. Disney would control a market by themselves once again. (2-D animation till the late 90's, 3-D until 2001 (Shrek)).
No one really knowns the full extent of the terms. PIXAR may have wanted to much. Is it really worht Disney's time to only get a 10% dist. rights?
For Nemo:
USA B.O.- $304 Million
Disney got half- $152 Milion
Under say a new 10% contract- $30.4 Million.
It's not that much. Also rumors that PIXAR would keep Copyrights which would limit Disney's ability to make profits off of other things. Lastly, Disney still has 2 more PIXAR movies and PIXAR won't be releasing anything soon earliest 2007. In a market that's getting many more hands in it I think that maybe Eisner has made the right decision.
Maybe now PIXAR's done Disney should go buy Jim Henson. Disney would control a market by themselves once again. (2-D animation till the late 90's, 3-D until 2001 (Shrek)).
MKCustodial
Well-Known Member
Still analizing those figures, how much did Pixar invest in the movie, and how much did Disney invest in the movie? THink about that...
garyhoov
Trophy Husband
I haven't read much detail about the proposed deal or previous agreements, so I'm hoping you or someone else can answer this. Is that 30 million pure profit? What are they losing or potentially losing?
It seems that collecting 30 million dollars might not be as good as 92 million dollars, but it would be better than 0 dollars.
prisoner
New Member
Sure, $30M seems like only a little relatively speaking.
But compare it to, for example, Treasure Planet which lost them $43M.
At the same token - that $30M would have come from a lower risk venture - they're being paid a marketing fee instead of being part of the investment. Lower risk - lower rewards.
But compare it to, for example, Treasure Planet which lost them $43M.
At the same token - that $30M would have come from a lower risk venture - they're being paid a marketing fee instead of being part of the investment. Lower risk - lower rewards.
prberk
Well-Known Member
I posted this in the animation thread, but I thought it important enough to mention here:
The 1/30/04 Orlando Sentinel article (http://www.orlandosentinel.com/busi...30,1,5279841.story?coll=orl-dp-weekend-2-main) about the breakup ended thus:
For some in the Pixar family, a split would have significance beyond dollars and cents: Lasseter is a former Disney animator.
Roy Disney said it was Lasseter who told him about the collapse of negotiations.
"He feels as awful as I do about this," Roy Disney said in a phone interview. "He said he's a Disney man, as are so many of the guys up there. Disney blood flows through their veins."
To me, that about says it all...
The 1/30/04 Orlando Sentinel article (http://www.orlandosentinel.com/busi...30,1,5279841.story?coll=orl-dp-weekend-2-main) about the breakup ended thus:
For some in the Pixar family, a split would have significance beyond dollars and cents: Lasseter is a former Disney animator.
Roy Disney said it was Lasseter who told him about the collapse of negotiations.
"He feels as awful as I do about this," Roy Disney said in a phone interview. "He said he's a Disney man, as are so many of the guys up there. Disney blood flows through their veins."
To me, that about says it all...
NowInc
Well-Known Member
Well...this mostly comes because...GUESS WHO WAS THE MAN BEHIND THE BULK OF NEGOTIATIONS WITH PIXAR....heres a hint..he's gone.
Pixar DOES need a partner tho, and its got VERY limited options.
Dreamworks isnt going to sign em
Lucas has his own cartoon studio in the works
Warner Bros...dont have enough money to co-sign with em..nor do they have the marketing power..
You havnt seen the end of the talks..trust me. It could very well be a corporate scare tactic.
AND...there are more than 2 pixar cartoons pending release...i know of 5 others in pre-production/entry production. Who owns those? Guess
Pixar DOES need a partner tho, and its got VERY limited options.
Dreamworks isnt going to sign em
Lucas has his own cartoon studio in the works
Warner Bros...dont have enough money to co-sign with em..nor do they have the marketing power..
You havnt seen the end of the talks..trust me. It could very well be a corporate scare tactic.
AND...there are more than 2 pixar cartoons pending release...i know of 5 others in pre-production/entry production. Who owns those? Guess
garyhoov
Trophy Husband
That's what I've been hoping. I pointed out the importance of Pixar to Disney, but it goes both ways. Pixar gets a lot of marketing by having exposure all over Disney World, in Disney Stores etc.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if Steve Jobs is waiting out the March 3rd meeting.
I'm sure this is a stretch, but here's something to think about just for fun. I've heard SJ suggested as a replacement for Eisner. Is there even a slight possibility he's playing this to get people upset prior to the March 3rd meeting, push Eisner out, and set himself up to be his replacement? Just something to make you go hmmmmmmmm.
mac388
New Member
I was actually thinking this exact same thing. Now, I do have a pretty extensive imagination, but hear me out. Steve Jobs broke off these talks right before the March shareholders' meeting. Let's just say that Mike Eisner does resign or get fired. Then, that leaves the door open for Jobs, who has been named as being one of the people to take over the CEO job. Then we get Pixar back! Yay!
But thinking about that...would he also run Apple? I love my ibook, but I'm not sure how that would play out. He does such a good job of running that company too.
NowInc
Well-Known Member
Steve Jobs as CEO of disney would just make things way worse. First of all, he has a pretty shady corporate history (those who ever followed the great computer wars of the 80s), has a pretty well documented history of drug usage (yeah..i know he's probobly past that at this point..but uh..not exaclty someone youd want to be CEO of DISNEY), and wouldnt know what to do with such a large corporation with so many divisions. Apple and Pixar are both big..yes..but combined they arent even half of what Disney is. Eisner came from paramount, which at the time owned a LOT of different divisions..so it was an easier transition.
....all that aside...expect pixar talks to resume by the end of the summer
....all that aside...expect pixar talks to resume by the end of the summer