Pixar doesn't NEED Disney to make incredibly fantastic movies.

Pixar USES Disney to make sure that their incredibly fantastic movies get noticed.

Let's be completely frank: Toy Story would not have been the massive hit it was without the Disney seal. Disney is a master of marketing, advertising, and branding. They push their upcoming films on their Disney Channel and Toon Disney networks, thus generating constant exposure to their core family audiences, plug the films at the theme parks in which hundreds of thousands of people enter every day, plug the films on their own network of radio stations, newspapers, and television networks (ABC and ABC Family, mostly.)

Disney is omnipresent, and when they have a vested interest in a property they can market it better than almost anyone.

BUT...

The Disney name can get butts in the seats. However, the quality of a movie will get butts to come back. And PIXAR is supreme at getting butts to return. Their movies are pieces of perfection, and people tell their friends, neighbors, family, etc. to go see Nemo, Monsters, Toy Story, etc..

Pixar will be a brand name that can sell itself at one point. But they are not there yet. As a public company they are answerable to shareholders, and a significant flop could be disastrous. To place it in perspective, Disney's widely-acknowledged flop known as Treasure Planet, which cost $140 million (+ marketing) and barely cracked $90 million at worldwide b.o., will eventually become profitable for Disney, due their extensive revenue streams available to their properties (home video, merchandising, software, toys, etc.) To place it in perspective, if Pixar had a $150 million self-financed and self-distributed film that tanked, you can probably bet that production budgets, R&D, and development costs would be significantly reduced for future projects.

I agree with the opinion that Pixar's output has, since November 1995, consistently beat the pants off of every Disney animated film since. But don't count the House of Mouse out yet. There's a reason why all the creative personnel at Pixar (including Lasseter) want to stay associated with Disney. The question is, does upper management (and by upper management, I mean Steve Jobs) want to? Signs point to "groiny."

You're right, Pixar may need distribution and marketing help, but they don't need it from Disney. They can get it from any big studio, and they'll get it from the studio that gives them the best deal. To say Pixar needs Disney as much as Disney needs Pixar is ludicrous. There is only one Pixar and there are plenty of distribution studios. In the end, I think they'll stay paired together because Disney won't want anyone else to get a hold of Pixar. At the very least, as many people have said, the new deal will largely favor Pixar. When that happens, it will be proof enough that Disney needs Pixar more than Pixar needs Disney.

Disney owns the rights to the characters made under the current contract. Disney can make a sequel to any of the films if they choose to, with or without Pixar's involvment.