Found this on the CNN Money website, http://money.cnn.com/2005/10/31/news/midcaps/pixar_disney/index.htm
and thought that some of you would be interested.
Jobs ready to sell Pixar: Report
Newspaper says animated studio head open to the right deal; receptive to offer from partner Disney.
October 31, 2005: 9:08 AM EST
The success of the Walt Disney Co. film "Chicken Little" could determine whether Disney or partner Pixar has the greater leverage in upcoming talks.
Pixar has had nothing but hits since it started making films in 1995.
Disney Chicken Little Toys Now in Stock
Toys and figures from the upcoming Disney's chicken little animated adventure...
www.toyrocket.com
Chicken Little - Official Site
When it comes to saving the world, it helps to be a little chicken. Walt Disney...
disney.go.com
NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Steve Jobs, the chairman and CEO of Pixar Animation Studios, would be open to a sale of the company at the right price, according to a published report.
The New York Times reports Jobs, who owns about 50 percent of Pixar (Research), would want a strong premium to its current $5.9 billion market capitalization to consider a sale, but he would be open to an offer from its long-time partner, Walt Disney Co. (Research) The paper attributed Jobs' willingness to consider a sale to "two people with knowledge of the talks" now taking place between Disney and Pixar about possibly extending their partnership.
But the paper reports that in talks about a new version of their partnership, Disney CEO Robert Iger has yet to make an offer to acquire Pixar. The paper reports that Disney is hoping that its new animated feature, "Chicken Little," due in theaters this weekend, will give it greater leverage in talks with Pixar.
"Chicken Little" is the first offering from Disney's animation studio since it was revamped to produce computer-generated features that have a three-dimension look, rather than the traditional hand-drawn two-dimensional cartoons.
Pixar has produced only CG features and nothing but blockbusters since it started producing movies in 1995, while many of the Disney-generated animated movies during the period were considered box office flops.
The Times reports that if "Chicken Little" is a hit, it would show Wall Street and Jobs that Disney need not depend on Pixar for creation of new animated movie characters that could be adapted for theme park rides, consumer products and television.
The movie has gotten generally favorable early word, but if it is not well received by critics or moviegoers, the paper reports that Jobs will gain leverage in his talks with Disney because the media conglomerate would be seen as relying on Pixar to add new stories to its creative arsenal.
If the movie performs poorly, Bernstein & Co. media analyst Michael Nathanson told the paper, "investors might want to see a Pixar deal right behind it." Still, he added, "it's all about numbers, and both sides - Disney and Pixar - are looking for leverage."
Pixar has strong cash reserves and no longer needs Disney's to help finance films, so it is looking for a distribution agreement for a far larger percent of the box office than the 50 percent it receives under the current deal with Disney.
But while there are likely to be other studios willing to distribute Pixar films, analysts see Disney as best positioned to promote future Pixar films and its characters due to theme parks and strong merchandise sales channels.
Jobs would evaluate any Pixar partnership based on where he could get the best deal for the studio, the paper reports, not on his developing friendship with Iger. Jobs often sparred with Iger's predecessor, Michael Eisner. The Disney Channel and ABC, other units of Disney, recently signed a deal to distribute shows on the new video version of the Apple Computer (Research) iPod. Jobs is also Chairman and CEO of Apple.
The Times reports that detailed negotiations between Disney and Pixar are likely to begin in mid-November and could be wrapped up by late December or early January, said one of the paper's sources. The studios have several issues to grapple with, according to the paper, including who would have creative oversight over new Pixar characters at Disney theme parks and how revenue from rides and other attractions would be split.
...we must all face a choice, between what is right... and what is easy."
...we must all face a choice, between what is right... and what is easy."
Microsoft needs to buy them. Heh heh heh...
The Pixar employees need to buy up controling interest in Pixar, if they wont to keep making winning feature films.
its a question of how much input Disney had in the physics of wht happened at Pixar. If they can keep the balance after purchasing it then we might be onto something here.
Thing is Disney is saddled with about $10billion of debt and their market cap isnt very very high either.Im not sure at the moment of cash reserves but i do know tht close to $400million is tied up with the Pirates sequels.
So in the end is where will the mone come from? more debt? stock swap will be pointless and Jobs dosent have to do anything he dosent want to.
Also if Disney does buy em out there will be layoffs i reckon. they dont need an inhouse production team as well as Pixar then
I hope this doesn't happen. I guess Jobs will concentrate on Apple full time.
I wish he would do something like this with OSX for all pcs.
im confused. why would jobs sell pixar and not just make a new partnership with somebody else or be independent?
if disney OWNED pixar (or any other place for that matter) would they still be bringing in the awesome talent they have for their films?
"who wouldn't want to make stuff for me? I'm awesome." -Bloo
because in the scheme of things Pixar isnt at the same level as Apple in the grand scheme of things. Jobs can cash out as well having brought it along quite nicely.
Also i think Pixar will have to go above and beyond the call of duty to get higher and gain critical mass. the truth is they are def the leaders in the market right now but there needs to be a plan for the future. where do they go? what do they do? a growth strategy.
there could be competition round the corner and then if things dont work out Pixar will still be a strong contender but it might have strong competition.
combining with Disney or Dreamworks (highly unlikely as they were looking to sell themselves as well) would allow them to go on making strong products and leverage the brand with distribution (Disneys present strong point)
might not be as bad an idea. but it depends on how Disney if they do bite, go about it.
last i checked jobs isnt about the money though(if thats what you mean). he only gets paid a dollar a year by apple.
I always wanted Pixar to use its awesome storytelling power to make more adultish films. The Incredibles was probably one of the most adultish of all their movies.
If they become owned by disney then i fear this will never happen and we will just be stuck with awesome looking kid stuff.
(this coming from a guy who watches nickelodeon and cartoon network most of the time)
"who wouldn't want to make stuff for me? I'm awesome." -Bloo
i hate to break it to ya mate but business is business
& business is all about money.
Jobs gets paid $1 a year as salary which is true but he also recieved something like $30million in stock a few years ago & before that he recieved a Gulfstream V as well (if you are in the market for one its about $90million)
so between 1999-2003 Jobs has recieved gifts of $120million which comes to about $15mil + a year. plus of course $6
Well the good news is Eisner is officially and totally out of the picture. But I still wish Pixar would just drop Disney in the dust... guess I'm just feeling a little vengeful still after that whole "2D is Dead" comment. ;)
2d is only dead until a few 3d flicks bomb. its holllywood at best they are a herd.
anyway i dont really see Eisner as such a bad guy. he was the one who took them out of their slump.
but then he did hire the 'dwarf'
2D will never die.
I think Eisner specifically said "2D has gone the way of black and white"... just as ignorant of a statment though. It didn't help my opinion of him when he shut down the Florida studio either.
Could you imagine if Disney hadn't had the opportunity to hook up with Pixar?
well. i think they are going to be fine. you will see 2d output but it might end up being made with 3d. i do see 2d moving away as a cinema medium because cinema has always been about moving forward.
anyway. i dont want to turn this into a 2d-3d debate.
I'm confused about skinnylizard's comment about hiring the "dwarf" . . . as well as he or she is wrong about DreamWorks looking to sell themselves . . . that's DreamWorks Pictures, not DreamWorks Animation (a separate, publicly-traded company).
well. the dwarf is Jeff Katzenberg who is the K of Dreamworks SKG. I actually did mean Dreamworks Films because i thought they would be up for it but i overestimated their capability.
Dreamworks animation who arent even in the running (considering they are about 1/3 of Pixar not counting debt in either company)
Sorry, I should have been a little more explicit. I knew who the "dwarf" was, but didn't understand how it related to Eisner being a bad guy, or taking Disney out of their slump. Katzenberg was actually the one who took them out of their slump.
if you look at how bad things got at that point with the litigation and bad PR at Disney...
it has nothing to do with how well JK did, the whole affair is a big blackspot on his resume.
Ok, now I'm confused. How did Katzenburg leaving Disney at the hight of their Feature Animation success leave a blackspot on his resume? After he left Disney Feature pretty much went down the tubes. Now I don't know how much Katzenburg had a hand in turning Disney Feature around, but I think it's generally accepted that he did. And like the guy or not, Eisner pretty much pulled Disney Co. back from the brink.
As for Jobs selling PIXAR, I don't think he'd be a good business man if he didn't consider selling. I'm not saying he will, but he needs to be open to all possibilities. Personally I think this is a negotiations tactic by Jobs. Dangle the thought of letting Disney buy PIXAR. Once they have their minds set on that, take it away and then present them with the distribution contract.
Besides, PIXAR needs Disney just as much as Disney Needs PIXAR. Disney is a marketing giant. I think a lot of people see PIXAR as this nice wholesome studio and Disney is the evil merchandizing machine. This way PIXAR keeps their nose clean yet still reaps the benifits.
Any way, thats my take on it.
Aloha,
the Ape
...we must all face a choice, between what is right... and what is easy."
man i must be way off my game.
Katzenberg def had a hand in moving Disney into the present era im guessing he was involved from Roger Rabbit upto Aladdin/Lion King.
the blackspot on Eisner is because of the way things ended and were handeled. it was quite acrimonious and then when things got lean a lot of it was blamed on the JK episode as the begining. (Regardless of how well Pixar and Disney did, this is another deal said to have been initiated and envisioned by JK)
personally i do like Eisner , i think he did a splendid job and might have just overstayed.
Jobs selling Pixar. i think if Jobs cant find a fellow distributor he might be tempted to def cash out for the most money. on the other hand he might just want a distributor since he has all the money he needs to make films on his own. i think its a waiting game to see how Disney does with their own CGI flicks. Valiant made a profit but it was nothing like the Pixar flicks.
could go either way. regardless of how it goes i think Jobs will win Big.