He didn't buy Pixar- he simply bought the rights to the technology. I'm more curious what his original intentions were on what to do with that technology.
Computers with the technology. When that failed, he allowed Lassiter and friends to make films to showcase its tech.
Interesting that Amazon didn't encounter "delays" with this book.
Instead of just plugging Amazon at the end of the story, you might mention that the hardcover is also available at many other book stores. You may get some compensation for plugging Amazon, but you're still somewhat of a news organization, and you could mention other booksellers. If this title were published by Hachette, would you still plug Amazon and its delayed shipping of Hachette books?
Cry me a river. Were you happy they didn't mention that you could also get it electronically from Amazon, or on audiobook from the Amazon subsidy Audible, or on hardback/paperback from the Amazon subsidy The Book Depository?
Thank God those two didn't get their hands on Pixar. They would have sold it off for spare parts long ago. Amazing how those things come about. Steve the proverbial 'right man at the right time'. Looking forward to reading the book.
It's funny that Catmull sort of brushed over the conflict between his co founder Alvy and Jobs. Alvy and Jobs Almost got into a fist fight. Jobs spent almost all of his personal fortune from the sale of his Appke stock (Almost $100 million) propping up Pixar for a decade. Most entrepreneurs would have given up long before that. They were months away from running out of cash and going bankrupt when Toy Story turned into a hit. Steve was also smart that he timed the IPO just as Toy Story was released so that it was a well sought after IPO. Just imagine the pressure Steve was in during this time in his life. He got fired from Apple. He then started Next which by this time he knew was a failure. The company that he spent most if his fortune on, Pixar, was also close to bankrupt. Then, just like that with the release of Toy Story, things started to all turn for him. The man had some set of brass balls.
The statement in the PIXAR Business Plan is wrong, referencing Steve as President and Chairman of the Board at NeXT. He was never the President, and always CEO, from its inception.
Steve spent a helluva lot more than $10 million getting PIXAR off the ground. It's one of the reasons he went out and got Perot and Canon to invest several hundred million into NeXT.
Alvy is still butthurt, to this day, because he had to ultimately sell most of his leverage in PIXAR to Steve, in order to keep PIXAR alive. Steve ultimately controllled over 80%.
Original Disney and Pixar 3-film contract from 1991. Unsurprisingly it put Disney in the catbird seat (that's a phrase you don't get to hear much anymore ) , but it also brought focus, direction and urgency to Pixar. While Mr Jobs reportedly wanted Pixar for it's software and computer sales potential he was smart enough to recognize that Lassiter just might have a gem in his movie-making plans. http://www.pixartouchbook.com/storage/toy-story-contract-1991.pdf
So IMO Disney had a bit to do with Pixar's (and Apples) eventual success too even tho they almost destroyed the movie creation itself by trying to form it into a traditional Disney-esque movie. As an example had they not agreed to cover the Toy Story cost overruns would Steve Jobs ever have landed back at Apple?
Thank God those two didn't get their hands on Pixar. They would have sold it off for spare parts long ago. Amazing how those things come about. Steve the proverbial 'right man at the right time'. Looking forward to reading the book.
Agreed. Makes me wonder how many amazing companies and products we'll never see because some venture capital firm decided that the parts were worth more eviscerated, dissected and sold off in the short term, rather than letting the sum of the whole grow, succeed and flourish over the long term...
And even more in that line of thinking- if he had never left Apple, would Apple have the rejuvenation it did with his return?
Of course not. A Steve that never leaves Apple never creates NeXT. No NeXT means no OS X. No OS X means, well... Copland. No iDevices, no iMac...
Additionally, a Steve not fired means a Steve still cruel. The early megalomaniacal Steve rather than the late one.
The failures of his life (even the ones built around successes, like Pixar’s computers and NeXT’s failure to capture marketshare) are what shaped him personally and business-ally upon his return.
<span style="line-height:1.4em;">And even more in that line of thinking- if he had never left Apple, would Apple have the rejuvenation it did with his return?</span>
Of course not. A Steve that never leaves Apple never creates NeXT. No NeXT means no OS X. No OS X means, well... Copland. No iDevices, no iMac...
Additionally, a Steve not fired means a Steve still cruel. The early megalomaniacal Steve rather than the late one.
The failures of his life (even the ones built around successes, like Pixar’s computers and NeXT’s failure to capture marketshare) are what shaped him personally and business-ally upon his return.
Comments
Computers with the technology. When that failed, he allowed Lassiter and friends to make films to showcase its tech.
Interesting that Amazon didn't encounter "delays" with this book.
Cry me a river. Were you happy they didn't mention that you could also get it electronically from Amazon, or on audiobook from the Amazon subsidy Audible, or on hardback/paperback from the Amazon subsidy The Book Depository?
who holds those Pixar shares now? Steves wife?
And if so, couldn't she stick it to giggle and samscum by mandating all Disney content be Apple exclusive?
Heck, last time Disney chose sides, Blu-Ray won.
Original Disney and Pixar 3-film contract from 1991. Unsurprisingly it put Disney in the catbird seat (that's a phrase you don't get to hear much anymore
http://www.pixartouchbook.com/storage/toy-story-contract-1991.pdf
So IMO Disney had a bit to do with Pixar's (and Apples) eventual success too even tho they almost destroyed the movie creation itself by trying to form it into a traditional Disney-esque movie. As an example had they not agreed to cover the Toy Story cost overruns would Steve Jobs ever have landed back at Apple?
Agreed. Makes me wonder how many amazing companies and products we'll never see because some venture capital firm decided that the parts were worth more eviscerated, dissected and sold off in the short term, rather than letting the sum of the whole grow, succeed and flourish over the long term...
And even more in that line of thinking- if he had never left Apple, would Apple have the rejuvenation it did with his return?
Of course not. A Steve that never leaves Apple never creates NeXT. No NeXT means no OS X. No OS X means, well... Copland. No iDevices, no iMac...
Additionally, a Steve not fired means a Steve still cruel. The early megalomaniacal Steve rather than the late one.
The failures of his life (even the ones built around successes, like Pixar’s computers and NeXT’s failure to capture marketshare) are what shaped him personally and business-ally upon his return.
The butterfly effect is a beautiful thing.
Good post. Powerful butterfly.