4 ms·

Reverse acquisition? IE, similar to how Disney "bought" Pixar, but much of Pixar's IP overshadows Disney's IP; or how Apple bought Next and the current MacOS is

Reverse acquisition? IE, similar to how Disney "bought" Pixar, but much of Pixar's IP overshadows Disney's IP; or how Apple bought Next and the current MacOS is basically NextOS under the hood. It's a technique that companies do to avoid disruption: Buy early stage startups, and by the time they could "disrupt" the parent company, the parent company's management is ready to retire, and the former startup's management is ready to take their place.

oidar 1y ago
NeXTSTEP not NextOS
- detourdog 1y ago
  If one is really after accuracy NeXT wasn't a start-up at the time of acquisition.
n2d4 1y ago
In what way does Pixar's IP overshadow Disney's? Listing the highest-grossing media franchises [1], Mickey Mouse, Winnie the Pooh, Star Wars, and Disney Princesses are on #2-#5 respectively, while Pixar's top spot is #16 with Cars. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-grossing_media_franchises https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-grossing_media...
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- CSMastermind 1y ago
  My understanding is that the talent at Pixar completely took over the leadership of Disney's animation studios.
- gwbas1c 1y ago
  Because, in the 1990s, Pixar's IP was more popular than Disney's. The story (as I remember it from a Jobs biography) was that, in the Disney parks, there were longer lines for Pixar characters than Disney characters. Someone in leadership (don't remember the name) basically swallowed pride and bought Pixar from Jobs. It was considered a "reverse acquisition" because Jobs had so much stock he technically controlled Disney afterwards.
  - n2d4 1y ago
    This was certainly true for animated movies in the 2000s (where Pixar clearly dominated), although not the companies as a whole. Pixar shareholders (including Jobs) owned about 15% after the deal. This isn't a reverse acquisition, it's just a normal acquisition. Company A (Disney) has many things but is missing one thing (an animation team that doesn't suck), so they buy a company that does have that thing.
    - pests 1y ago
      But what if company B ends up with majority ownership in company A in the end.
  - e3bc54b2 1y ago
    IIRC Jobs was the single largest shareholder of Disney after acquisition, so that checks out. Found the source: https://arstechnica.com/uncategorized/2006/01/6038-2/ https://arstechnica.com/uncategorized/2006/01/6038-2/

oidar 1y ago

NeXTSTEP not NextOS

detourdog 1y ago
If one is really after accuracy NeXT wasn't a start-up at the time of acquisition.

n2d4 1y ago

In what way does Pixar's IP overshadow Disney's? Listing the highest-grossing media franchises [1], Mickey Mouse, Winnie the Pooh, Star Wars, and Disney Princesses are on #2-#5 respectively, while Pixar's top spot is #16 with Cars. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-grossing_media_franchises https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-grossing_media...

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
CSMastermind 1y ago
My understanding is that the talent at Pixar completely took over the leadership of Disney's animation studios.
gwbas1c 1y ago
Because, in the 1990s, Pixar's IP was more popular than Disney's. The story (as I remember it from a Jobs biography) was that, in the Disney parks, there were longer lines for Pixar characters than Disney characters. Someone in leadership (don't remember the name) basically swallowed pride and bought Pixar from Jobs. It was considered a "reverse acquisition" because Jobs had so much stock he technically controlled Disney afterwards.
- n2d4 1y ago
  This was certainly true for animated movies in the 2000s (where Pixar clearly dominated), although not the companies as a whole. Pixar shareholders (including Jobs) owned about 15% after the deal. This isn't a reverse acquisition, it's just a normal acquisition. Company A (Disney) has many things but is missing one thing (an animation team that doesn't suck), so they buy a company that does have that thing.
  - pests 1y ago
    But what if company B ends up with majority ownership in company A in the end.
- e3bc54b2 1y ago
  IIRC Jobs was the single largest shareholder of Disney after acquisition, so that checks out. Found the source: https://arstechnica.com/uncategorized/2006/01/6038-2/ https://arstechnica.com/uncategorized/2006/01/6038-2/