In all honesty, I would have to say it's about time!  This would definately help from diluting the brand.  Now if they would only do the same thing with the dvd market.  They really should trim the number of titles out there and quite possibly put a better limit as to the length of time those movies should be around.  

ABOUT TIME (ditto).
Jobs revitilized Apple into what it is now, trusted, well liked, and pretty damn good products.
Will Disney become the same it used to be? We'll see.
Great article Jim.

This is the type of article I come to JHM for. It's great to see Disney manuvering itself to make fewer, high quality films than to just keep throwing movie after movie at the filmgoing public. I remember in the early to mid 90s any disney animated movie was a must-see..... I'm glad they're trying to use that approach with all their movies. Quality sells, and you don't even have to market it.......

Obviously Jobs has gonna have some influence at Disney, it's inevitable. But I hardly think he's emerging as the REAL power. Bob Iger has revitalised the company and has been a saving grace with or without Jobs' help. Still, it's nice to see an article on here that is actually optimistic about Disney for once.

First, congratulations to Jim for writing an entire info article about Apple and Disney in which the word "Lasseter" is never once mentioned. :)
Second:
---
"You see, back in 1998, right after Apple CEO Gil Amelio had been ousted and Steve had been named as interim head of that corporation, Jobs killed a number of Apple products (I.E. The Newton, Cyberdog & OpenDoc). All because -- in order for Apple Computer to return to greatness -- Steve felt that it was important for the corporation to concentrate on doing just a few things well."
---
Specifically, he thought that the Quadra, the Mac++, the AppleTV, etc., were confusing computer buyers who couldn't tell one from the other, and overhauled Apple with the "Model T" strategy that people should come to Apple to buy one immediately iconic product for each market that met their specific needsr:  The iMac, the Powerbook, and the PowerMac.

And when it comes to "Disney" and "In need of iconic brand product", you already know where we're headed on this one:
When people come to a Disney movie, they may not be coming to see an inspirational sports drama, teen chick-flix or Bruckheimer non-Pirates contract-filler--But when they come to see a theatrical animated, they expect to see a Disney movie, unless Pixar's name is on it.  And looks like a few certain hyperactive David Stainton-era Dreamworks-wannabe projects have just been tossed out with yesterday's Newtons...

Could this be Roy's Coup d'tate?  I mean, we haven't heard from him in a while.  And if you don't think Steve has any power... being the single largest share holder... You don't know Steve.

:TikiBird73 said:
Could this be Roy's Coup d'tate?"

Oh yes, I had forgotten that Roy & Jobs got along quite well, at least I seem to remember Jim reporting that.

Hey Jim, What is the status of that 40's Mickey, Donald, and Goofy pirate cartoon that may air with At World's End?

I don't trust Jobs.  At all.  I think he's overhyped, underwhelming, and continuously steps in piles of, well, luck.  We all know the story of how Pixar exploded despite his demands otherwise.  How about Apple?  Sure, he pushed for the iPod (and the DRM hell that is iTunes), but does it make Apple a bit of a one-trick pony?  Where would Apple be without the iPod?  Jobs turned the company around with that one product, but Apple's soul, the computer line?  Really only improved thanks to riding the iPod's coattails...


But I agree with him.
Disney needs to get back to quality.

Eisner was a bean counter.  All that mattered was money made today vs. money spent today, so he cut costs wherever possible and sunk money into what was currently profitable.  The result was a tarnished Disney brand.  What always sold Disney was it being quality - if something said "Disney" on it you knew you'd enjoy it.  Eisner changed that.  I think it was most evident in the parks, where rides got cheaper and garbage started appearing, but it was noticeable throughout the company.

Which is a problem.  When people trust the company less they turn to it less.  Simply put - I think Eisner killed the Magic of Disney, and I think someone needs to bring it back.
Eisner was all about money made today.  The thing is, sometimes you need to spend money today to ensure quality which, in turn ensures a steady stream of money tomorrow...

For Steve Jobs to be at the top of his game so consistently is more than mere luck.  I find him to be quite sincere, honest and ethical for refraining from taking pay for being on those boards.  Give the man his props.  

"For Steve Jobs to be at the top of his game so consistently is more than mere luck."

Apple didn't do all that well his first time around.
Apple was doing extremely poorly his second time around, it's market share still shrinking, much below 5%.
The iPod saved it.  

Pixar is extremely successful for its animation.  Jobs tried to squash its animation unit.  It wasn't until it started getting external recognition that Jobs turned to it.

Say what you will about Jobs being lucky or not, but the one constant is that he has always made sure Apple was known for quality.  If we can get Disney back to the same because he is whispering in Bob's ear, GREAT.  And major DITTO to the idea that the cut the crap that currently constitutes their straight to DVD line.  There is no excuse for  most of that.

Just a note about Steve Jobs' assets.  What most people don't realize is that, at this point, Jobs' Disney holdings dwarf his Apple holdings.  He's going to be paying pretty close attention at Disney.

If this is true i am glad that they are finally thinking of  concentrating on making the Disney name a qualilty brand again.  I agree with the first post.  The next step is for them to slash the production of the direct to DVD sequals that have diminsihed the Disney name.  I really feel that these constant cheap movies  (cinderella II) are the cause of Disney's diminshing status in the animation world.  People started getting used to seeing these cheap quality DVD's and its repetitive cycle in procudction that the just felt it was not worht the trip to the movies.

Lets hope that this also means that it will start affecting the quality of attractions in the theme parks and Disney gets back to its roots of quality over quantity

I believe that was one of the first things out of Lassiter's mouth during the merger -- the immediate need to get rid of these unnecessary direct-to-dvd sequals (unfortunately, not before The Fox & the Hound II and Brother Bear II).  But whether it came from Lassiter, Iger or Jobs -- its a good move for the company.  Put the quality back in the name so people can trust the product again.  Cinderella II?  Ugh.  Sometimes a happily-ever-after is all that's ever required.

"Lets hope that this also means that it will start affecting the quality of attractions in the theme parks and Disney gets back to its roots of quality over quantity."  

I fervently hope so! Great article Jim!

Amen and Amen. Many have long said that Disney needs to get back to making quality films. Couldn't be more excited to see this happening.

Small consolation for Nina Jacobson, but she greenlit Pirates and that paid off, and she balked at "Lady in the Water" for the exact same reasons the critics are panning it now, which then opened to a paltry (for M. Night) 18.2 million. Sounds to me like she knows what she's doing. Hope she lands on her feet and does well in the future.

"Apple didn't do all that well his first time around."

Actually, Apple started the Personal Computer craze in the first place.  And the Apple ][ was extremely successful.

"Apple was doing extremely poorly his second time around, it's market share still shrinking, much below 5%."

Actually, their market share is growing quite nicely, especially since the Intel switch.

"The iPod saved it."

Actually that would be the iMac (the one that looks like a gumdrop).  If it wasn't for Jobs returning in 1996 and returning Apple to what they started with, Apple would be history.


Just like when Walt lost Oswald, he found a way to bring things back.

All these wonderful business strategies are credited to Jobs? How nice for him.

I agree that one has to consider the future when making such decisions. There is a long term investment which we can lose sight of if we fail to reward those whose backs we build our good fortunes on.

Eisner should have known better, but he was too busy lining his own pockets. I just hope that's not simply a "boomer" thing, and that we can all come out of these unhealthy trends intact.

"I don't trust Jobs.  At all.  I think he's overhyped, underwhelming, and continuously steps in piles of, well, luck.  We all know the story of how Pixar exploded despite his demands otherwise.  How about Apple?  Sure, he pushed for the iPod (and the DRM hell that is iTunes), but does it make Apple a bit of a one-trick pony?  Where would Apple be without the iPod?  Jobs turned the company around with that one product, but Apple's soul, the computer line?  Really only improved thanks to riding the iPod's coattails..."

You pretty much just described 99% of the executives in this country. Most of them it's about being at the right place at the right time. I work for a bunch of them and it's been quite the illuminating experience. At least with Jobs, I know that he was there when it started for Apple. I may disagree with some of the ridiculousness of the iPod trend (mostly pricing) but he seems like a cool enough guy with a really good eye for the future.

Apple would not be Apple without jobs.

The personal computer industry took off largely because of the original macintosh system. That was spearheaded by  Jobs and developed through his vision.  Speaking of "Pirates"success , the original developers  under Jobs leadership flew the "Pirate" flag at Apple.

Apple and Jobs also developed desktop publishing and Quicktime.... let this one sink in because everything you are viewing on the web is derivative of most of the innovation that came out of Apple and largely driven by Jobs.  Anyone who has worked in the movie or publishing industry is aware of this.  The first successful digital editing system was made possible by Quicktime movies (AVID Media Suite Pro).

Apple as a company returned to prosperity after years of red ink when Jobs returned.
That 5% market represents billions of dollars with a higher profit margin and higher customer approval than any competitor.  Within a year of his return Jobs and crew rewrote the OS, developed an entirely new line of computers and brought Apple back from the brink of obscurity and into profitabilty. This is leadership and he has been recognized for his success.   I still use an original iMAC (It is 6 years old) that is far more reliable than the new Dell PC I am forced to use at work... thats outrageous.

Sony, Panasonic, Microsoft and every major consumer company are kicking themselves in the ---- for not coming up with a music system like iPod. Sony tried for 4 years (See last months Fortune cover story).  The iPod system is revolutionary in design and concept.  Microsoft is now playing their usual game of catchup, by buying out competitors and spending several billion dollars to bring out its ZUNE system this winter.

And as far as PIXAR is concerned, Jobs owned and nutured the company while still building NEXT computers and later taking on the CEO of Apple.  He may not have had the full vision of its creative possibilties but as a company it did florish.  I've known many a exec who would have cashed out long before.

So all in all, Steve has done a fairly amazing job of innovatiing the industry.  Luck can only take you so far in any business and with his long history of success I hope he'll do for Disney what he did for the original Apple, the Macintosh, the iMac, iPod, iTunes and PIXAR.

How much can Jobs take credit for?  Like any executive - if something works, they will take credit for it, and if it flops, they'll have to check with their assistant where the idea came from. For me, the suggestion that the word "quality" is being tossed around sounds very promising.

When Eisner took over, he was always consulting with the Bass brothers - at that time Disney's largest stock holder. Their words of wisdom - exploit the movie library on video and raise gate prices at the parks. Jack up income any way you can - with an eye on stock price and bonuses. I see Eisner as far luckier than Jobs - he didn't invent anything or create anything - he was given free reign to exploit several decades of archives, assets, and goodwill for his personal gain. It took a while for people to catch on, since their stock went up too.

I think it's safe to say Jobs is more creative than your average executive. Because of his past, quality people want to work for him just so they can say, "I worked for Steve Jobs." The same holds true for Lassetter. Not so for Mr. Iger. The key to all this is Iger - will he be willing to play a Frank Wells role, letting others bask in the spotlight, while controlling the details behind the scenes - or will he start to crave the public recognition that Eisner's did?  Iger will become very rich whichever path he chooses - maybe he'll choose the high road.

How much can Jobs take credit for? Thats a good question of any executive.
First look for repeatability of high performance.  Thats where true credit versus luck is displayed..
Second, look at originality.  Thats where true leadership is exhibited, not just trend following.
Finally look at longevity.  Probably the mark of a true industry leader.

Steve Jobs has been around for over 25 years and has earned the right to take credit.

For years, people blasted Walt Disney.  Saying he wasn't an artist and he took credit for
others work (which he didn't).  How much credit did he deserve?  Plenty of course.

Personally, I've worked in Silicon Valley for 50 years and knew Steve Jobs in high school very well.  When I first heard about him and Wozniak starting Apple, I thought it was another "big deal vapor product" that would go nowhere.  I was wrong big time.  I've worked at most of the large companies in the valley and I have seen executives come and go.  Lots of money has been made by many but no one has repeated the success of Jobs.  

This is a tough business and he deserves credit for steering along an amazing successful course, over and over again.

I only wish I had stayed in touch....

<i>Will all of these management changes, staff cuts plus this renewed emphasis on quality really have a significant impact on Disney's box office share? Or -- at the very least -- result in a few new watchable motion pictures?</i>

If you have to ask, you're not showing enough faith.

While they're making changes, they might want to sell Hollywood Pictures, especially since they hardly make movies anymore, and since their latest feature, Stay Alive, bombed.

"While they're making changes, they might want to sell Hollywood Pictures, especially since they hardly make movies anymore, and since their latest feature, Stay Alive, bombed."
---
Thought Hollywood Pictures and Touchstone only came about because of connections with the various 90's Silver Screen Partners companies--And that Disney only kept the name and some other production-company tie-ins into the 00's essentially for label value, when they wanted to dilute their brand for dramas, action, or teen product.
In fact, not sure, but think Touchstone and Hollywood -WERE- official casualties of last week's "massacre" reshuffle, which explains the departure of Cook, Jacobsen, and various middle-management.

PingBack from http://animation.eblogzone.com/?p=25