This could single-handedly be the most asinine post I have ever read.

"Emotional extortion?" It's a business model. Put the product out for a limited time, remove it, build up demand, and release again. If your kids loathe you because you won't buy them whatever they want whenever they want it, you have wretched little shits for children and need to instill them when a balanced set of morals as soon as possible and stop wasting precious time blaming Disney for your shortcomings.

"Price gouging": you may have had a point... in 1999. It's 2003, and Disney product has been priced to sell for years. Lion King comes out in a deluxe two-disc set on Tuesday, and you can pick it up for $16 at many B&M's. Compare that to say, oh I don't know, absolutely any Paramount release? Disney DVDs are priced as competitively as anyone else's.

"Clamshells and Tins": and with this, you might as well blame Disney for sunspots and the problems in the Middle East. Or you could look at some of Artisan's truly bizarre packaging, or Universal's early use of jewell cases for DVDs, or Warner's continued use of Snappers. Besides, what's wrong with tins? Inside the tin the DVDs are kept in regular cases, so at least you have a choice.

Disney has pulled some questionable movies in the DVD arena in the past, but I think they've more than made up for it with some pretty stellar (and reasonably priced) material. And at least their trailers are skippable -- thanks, Universal.

Dude, Matt is my Hero of the Week.

Disney definitely helped Pixar financially, and they will be hardpressed to get by without support from them or another studio.

I'd love to see this free Pixar up to make some "adult" cartoons. It would be awesome to see a movie with their bad ass animation and more adult characters/plot.

Great post, Matt.

Um.. $295,713,028 domestic?



& $106,808,336 domestic?

Peanut Butta Jelly!! Peanut Butta Jelly!! Peanut Butta Jelly with a baseball bat!!

I know you aint dancing for Jamie Lee Curits, so leads me to ask.. who are you doing the PB&J dance for Pixy? Lindsay Lohan? Johnny depp ?

Why both if I had my way.

Well can't really blame you. I think I would turn ghay for depp aswell.

Well I never said my kids(whom is a week old) did this, it is what is known as an exaggeration. Way to over react and attack me (or actually my child and/or parenting), very nice.
Disney is the WORSE of putting stuff OOP, and I do not know of another company that has advertised that it will be gone for 10 years.

I worked part time at a B&M last shristmas and I saw gouging in December 2002, okay so Lion King is a good price, what about all the others released at a much higher price? School House Rock comes to mind.

I never said I had a problem with this, I simply listed it. Please see my other post.

you worked in retail. You should know that MSRP is not the price it really ever goes at but is listed there. get over it. you still haven't listed anything that disney has done to pixar to hold them back in film making and the whole toy story sequel doesn't really factor in since hey, it was a loop hole in the contract.

I don't know what planet you've been living on, but recently I've purchased 3 big Disney releases at very competitive prices. The last one was Sleeping Beauty, which considering the quality of the release, I got for a steal.

I don't blame Disney for not making a deal that cuts their own throat. There's 2 big issues that Pixar is just flat out wrong on.

1. Disney is wary, for instance, of ceding too much space on its release schedule for Pixar films that it would no longer own.

2. A major sticking point is Pixar's demand that even upcoming films "The Incredibles" and "Cars," both due under the current contract, be subject to the more Pixar-friendly terms of the proposed deal. Pixar is trying to change the current contract, which they signed. Stick by your commitments.

If I were Disney, I wouldn't give into either of those issues either.

Seems to me from what I've read, Disney is not afraid to break it off with Pixar. If Pixar is so confident, why are they even negotiating. Finish the current contract and head out on your own. Put your money where your mouth is.

Good post Matt. I usually dont agree with you but . I wonder what the situation will be if that rat movie fails? Do you think Pixar could swallow their pride and go back to Disney?

That's what I've been thinking. Now, it's way too early to think it won't succeed. But it's the least appealing idea I've seen come from Pixar. The point is this. Pixar's films are incredibly expensive to make. Probably on the order of a hundred million, give or take. Can Pixar afford to pay all the costs of making a hundred million dollar film, plus it's marketing costs. Marketing alone would add at least another 25 million. Could Pixar by themselves withstand a very expensive film bombing? How about two in a row? I don't think so. Disney is huge. They can withstand a film that fails.

My point is this. A time is coming when a Pixar film falls flat on it's face. Perhaps they go through a streak where a number of films fall flat. People don't believe it now because they've had a string of successes. I'll only say this. So did Disney at one point. There was a time when people didn't think Disney could do anything wrong, at least 2 times in their history. Then they went on a dry spell. Sooner or later, the same thing will happen to Pixar. They can't withstand something like that, not without getting many, many times bigger and richer as a company.

That's why they are bargaining with Disney as we speak. SO don't assume Disney needs Pixar and Pixar doesn't need Disney. Disney survived long before Pixar. They'll survive without them if they have to.

I just would like to see the relationship continue. Disney and Pixar's history has been so beneficial for both parties. Sure, Pixar should get the lion's share of profits, but they have a lot to gain from Disney's extensive marketing muscle. And Disney, through Pixar, still retains distribution fees as well as market visibility through their relationship with Pixar.

Plus -- and this is a purely selfish reason -- I love going to the shops at WDW and browsing the aisles filled with Pixar merchandise, especially when its a good month or two until the film opens. I saw Nemo this year on the DLP screen at Downtown Disney, and it was such a hoot.

Man, am I easy.

Could agree more. They both gain a lot from each other from this partnership.

Pixar was originally pissed that Disney would not include Toy
Story 2 in their contract as it was originally to be a straight to
video release and their deal was for (5 I think) non sequel
theatricals. That started the rift. Plus there's always money (re:
greed).

Did Pixar need Disney? Yes.
Did Disney need Pixar? Probably not.
Did Disney benefit from Pixar? Yes.
Will Disney go on just fine without Pixar? Yes.
Will Pixar succeed without Disney? Yes.

Pixar will continue to succeed. They will hook up with someone
else for a one picture deal or or multi picture deal on distribution.
Their stuff will still be all over the toy stores, fast food kids meals,
coloring books, TV spin-offs, so on and so forth.

Who knows, Pixar may become a Disney type conglomerate some
day.

Have a nice day,

Jason

Domestic Box Office:
NEMO: $335.7 million (budget - $90 million)
Monsters Inc: $255.8 million (budget - $115 million)
Toy Story 2: $245.8 million (budget - $90 million)
Toy Story: $191.7 million (budget - $30 million)
Bugs Life: $162.8 million (budget - $45 million)

...in case you were wondering

Oh, and Brother Bear looks really bad...

IMHO

Jason

just to mention 2 things....

pixar has absolutely no debt. they only have a surplus so going it on their own would go a little way for now. eventually they will probably need to team up again, but i do think they are financially able to go it alone if they think they must.

also, there has not been a definite stance that pixar is leaving disney, they are just rebargaining. if disney decides not to accept then they'll leave. (both parties have stated that they would like to see the relationship continue) eisner has said he's getting ready to face the board on this issue and hopes they agree to meet pixar's demands. (alas, it is up to eisner anyway, but this is something he wants the board to agree with)

Disney is actually taking steps to turn out decent live-action movies as opposed to putting all of its eggs into the animation department like it used to do. So far, it seems to be working, but Haunted Mansion doesn't really look that great IMO. Doubt it will matter, it's a movie aimed at kids being released for the Holidays, so it's most likely money in the bank.

Schoolhouse Rock was ALSO $29.99 SRP and available in stores for under $20. Not to mention the fact that they included every single short created. Maybe you could have picked a worse example to prove your point, but I'm not sure.

Be careful what you say...that's what everyone said about Pirates of the Caribbean.

That's true! But as I said before, Disney is picking up the tab for 50% of their film production costs, as well as all of the marketing of Pixar's films. Also, Pixar hasn't had a bomb yet. If Pixar suddenly has to foot the entire bill for production and marketing, and eventually has a bomb or two, which is going to happen sometime, then they'll have debt. Of course, their business is also confined to just making those films.

However, didn't Pixar just build some huge, fancy new building and offices in the last 3-4 years? That's serious debt. I'd be surprised if they paid that off.

The one thing that makes me think that Pixar is the winner is this: look at the last.... 6 or so Disney animated films. How many Disney movies flop and how many Pixar movies flop? Pixar hasn't made a turkey yet, look at Disney's attempt with Dinosaur. Too often I see their new animated attempts labeled disappointments (lilo and stitch was great though). If Pixar can take that same magic elsewhere, Disney could be looking at a serious competitor (especially if their response is Dinosaur 2)

You know what, things are not going to be rosy in the park for Pixar if/when they go it alone. As others have said in part, they wil be the ones footing the bill for production costs, advertising, marketing, etc.,. Every single aspect that has never been a factor in the Pixar ledger is now an expense. I'm not sayin Pixar will fail, it's just not an assured cash cow if/when they cut ties w/ Disney.

And I'm not so sure this latest newsbit signals the end of the relationship. I think Pixar is merely moving forward with their own plans rather than waiting on a signed contract with Disney or whomever. The ownership issue is a huge point, so the fact that they will have complete ownership of the 2006 project would not change even if a new deal was signed with Disney. That would be the central part (Pixar retaining ownership of their films) of any new deal that is signed with Disney.