Walt Disney Pixar Case Analysis

Almost every fall, Disney and Pixar would team up and create a family friendly film that would have “anthropomorphic creatures or objects rendered with state-of-the-art computer graphics.”(Babich 235) Then later on in the summer Disney would come out with one of its more classic movies ,a 2D animated film

As one can see in Exhibit 1 in (1), revenues under CEO Eisner had risen from $1,656 billion (1984) to astonishing $25,402 billion. Also, shareholder return increased dramatically. Disney’s stock value relative to the S&P500 (represent the overall performance of the stock market) went up from “1” ($100 million/$100 million) in 1984 to around “2,649” ($3,226 million/$1,218 million) in 2000. Thus, Disney under Eisner generated an amazing “26%” annual total return to shareholders (2).

Disney has been successful in capturing value from synergies. In Eisner’s estimation, the company had re-discovered the synergistic culture that had helped build the company.

Disney used the character of Mickey Mouse and others to create movies that customers enjoyed like “Beauty and the Beast” while Pixar was producing made up animated characters to create films like “Cars” and “Wall-E”. Disney was creating animated movies but struggling to generate the amount of money Pixar was making on producing only one movie a year. Disney wanted to grow in creating more animated movies and decided to buy out Pixar in 2006 for $7.4 million dollars. (Barnes, 2008) According to Disney’s CEO Robert

Within every organization there is some type of conflict, whether the conflict is personal, organizational or emotional. But the key is to manage the conflict so as to not hinder the profitability, functionality or public image of the company so that it is viable competitively. In the case of the Walt Disney Company, although the company had conflict within the organization, this did not hinder its competitiveness. The company still was able to compete, even with the public knowledge of its conflict with the company’s owner Michael Eisner. What is important to understand about conflict is that there are several types of conflict, there are different

Buying energetic, young and creative Pixar, Disney intends to regain lost ground. But, they must do that in a smart way, to satisfy the needs of the Pixar owners, shareholders and employees. Back to the ownership test, the Disney ownership of Pixar will produce a greater competitive advantage for them. They will lose a powerful competitor, and will produce something

Introduction: The Walt Disney Company is on the threshold of a new era. Michael Eisner has stepped down from his position as CEO and turned over the reigns to Robert Iger. A lot of turmoil has been brewing through the company over the last four years; many people are hoping that this change in leadership will put Disney back on the road to success. Issues began around mid-2002; when declining earnings, fleeing shareholders, and

Disney’s acquisition of Pixar had both benefits and implications for both parties involved. By acquiring Pixar, Disney was given access to Pixar’s proprietary technology, which was an important factor, as well as access to new characters. These characters provided a new source of income for Disney, not just for movies, but also to use in theme parks, merchandise stores, etc., meaning new characters would supply immense revenue streams for Disney in several forms. Disney also gained strengthened market power, as acquiring one of their rivals would give them a competitive advantage and would simultaneously make them more powerful in the market. Additionally, Disney was never very successful with their animated movies, and acquiring Pixar would

In addition, by having access to the Pixar brand and its characters, they would help to supplement Disney’s existing characters across its different businesses like theme parks, merchandise, and television, which provide more sales opportunities. Despite the dilution of Disney’s earnings per share, it is for the short-term. The acquisition fills a crucial strategic gap for Disney and can create long-term value for its shareholders. As such, Pixar is a “near perfect strategic fit” for Disney and hence should be acquired by Disney to remain competitive.

This study examines how leadership, teamwork, and organizational learning can contribute in making mergers and acquisitions work. Our intention is to identify critical factors and practices needed for merger success. Our research is part of an ongoing project, and builds on previous analysis of merger success/failure in such organizations as Standard Oil, Exxon Mobile, and Time Warner-AOL. In this paper, we turn our attention to the recent merger of Pixar and Disney. In our view, the Disney-Pixar case seems to be a good example of a successful merger in progress. This is demonstrated very clearly by recent box office successes such as Academy Award

In a world where technology is rapidly developing and evolving, it is sometimes hard to keep up with the changes that are made. When looking back on changes that are made it is particularly interesting to look at the development of animation over history. Today when one thinks about animation it is impossible not to think of Disney and their major motion pictures. The Shreck films, Finding Nemo, and Happy Feet, to name just some of the dozens of animated films Disney has produced, raked in million upon millions of dollars at the box office, and have been hit films with people in all age groups.

As a subsidiary company of Disney, one of the biggest companies in the entertainment industry, Pixar has strong financial support. Disney provides the production cost of the films, and it handles marketing and films promotions as well as distributions. Each of Pixar’s films made between $300 million and $1 billion at the box office, and two of them have exceeded $1 billion in income (Lynch, 2016).

To conclude, Pixar has many opportunities that can be explored, in both the global and local markets. There is a lot of potential for

Known to be one of the largest producers of multi-media content, Walt Disney and Pixar greatly impacted the entertainment industry with the use of three-dimensional generated content. It quickly gained popularity with the release of its animated movies and especially got the attention of children from their sequels. With the growing popularity, the competition in the media industry began to increase. Disney was then faced with a difficult decision regarding its relationship with Pixar on whether they should acquire or not acquire the company.

Another creative and profitable partnership with Pixar’s Steve Jobs was eventually damaged because of Eisner’s “abrasive style and tendency toward micromanagement” (Ivancevich, Konopaske & Matteson, 2011, p. 337). Disney had joined forces with Pixar to finance and distribute films produced with new digital technology. Eisner claimed that “Disney didn 't really need Pixar anymore, since the Mouse already legally had the right to make sequels to Toy Story and all of the other films that Pixar had produced” (Hill, 2012). Also, Eisner’s degrading comments about Apple Computer during the testimony he