January 25, 2006 4:00 AM PST
Perspective: How long before Jobs is Disney's new boss?
See all Perspectives
Underperforming household consumer company announces a blockbuster acquisition that catapults Steve Jobs into an insider. The welcoming current CEO says he looks forward to a productive working relationship. After less than a year of corporate intrigue, the old CEO is out the door and guess who now runs the show?
In December 1996, Apple Computer bought Next Computer, a foundering company that Jobs formed after leaving Apple in 1988. The deal was the crowning career mistake of Gil Amelio, Apple's chief executive at the time, who was desperate to reverse a famously feckless tenure.Listen up
CNET News.com reporters talk about the implications of the Disney-Pixar deal.
Listen now...
(10MB mp3)
Even in the pre-iPod era, Jobs was already a bona fide media star. Everybody except Amelio knew that Jobs would end up back on top, and it only took a half year before the Apple co-founder became CEO. The prodigal son had returned home for good.
Disney CEO Bob Iger is a decidedly different type of corporate animal, and his company is hardly the serial screwup that Apple was in the prolonged twilight of the Sculley-Spindler-Amelio era.
In his public comments today, Jobs dismissed suggestions that Disney's Pixar buy was akin to letting the fox into the henhouse. He mugged for the cameras, saying the deal is only about Pixar buying into Iger's vision of where he wants to take Disney, along with the man's understanding of animation.
Is that the full story line? If so, central casting should be calling for a rewrite.
To be sure, Jobs does have his hands full keeping Apple on track. And Iger does legitimately want to transform Disney. Last year Disney became the first big content company to push content through Apple's iPod. Now Iger will be seeking out ways to distribute Disney-Pixar content through the iPod and any other digital devices coming up from Apple.
But pardon my sarong if I don't believe everything Jobs says. He is an executive of rare accomplishment. He also is a practiced corporate finagler with large ambitions.
As long as Disney's earnings-per-share continue to climb, there's no pressing reason for Jobs to enter the picture. But we're talking about a legendary entrepreneur with a unique understanding of both the computer and entertainment industries.
If Disney falters, will Jobs be able to resist the temptation to meddle? If Iger fails to deliver, would Disney's board be able to ignore the presence of a superstar CEO waiting in the wings (not to mention one who will become Disney's largest shareholder)?
In recent years, the company's mediocre performance has tested the patience of Disney shareholders. In 2004, a full-blown revolt led by Roy Disney, nephew of founder Walt Disney, and fellow board member Stanley Gold, ultimately led to the ouster of Michael Eisner as CEO. Now that investor expectations have again been raised, disappointments will go down extra hard.
Biography
Charles Cooper is CNET News.com's executive editor of commentary.
See more CNET content tagged:
Disney Corp.,
Pixar Animation Studios Inc.,
Steve Jobs,
Gil Amelio,
CEO
[Edited by: admin on Jan 25, 2006 11:24 AM]
enough to figure out how to make windows "user friendly". Apple
has always produced the superior computer and the general public,
in their computer infancy, is starting to realize it. Look at Apples'
market recent share.
As for the rest, Steve is Pixar's biggest shareholder, when Disney
trades stock to buy out Pixar, Steve will get the majority of the
stock. That makes Steve the single biggest shareholer of Disney
stock. That hardly qualifies as a corporate take over...
Besides whether you like Apple or not they seem to be doing just
fine for a "crappy company that makes nothing but junk,..".
Maybe this is a good thing and Disney can learn something from
Steve.
Steve may not always be right, but Apple is in the best shape of
it's life so he must not be all that wrong either...
> Didn't Steve Jobs try to take all the credit
> for the Windows that Bill Gates invented?
LOL! In fact, probably the most valuable document
MS owns is a piece of paper signed by ex-Apple
President John Scully giving MS permission to make
an OS that resembles Mac OS.
Go to http://www.dcs.napier.ac.uk/~bill/rambling15.html and
read the purple sidebar for the story on how it
came about.
To read about the lawsuit that resulted from this
deal, go here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Computer%
2C_Inc._v._Microsoft_Corp.
Oh - and I prefer watching it on a screen larger than my iPod. Thanks.
If Igar fail to deliver, out he goes and Steve will step in. Keep in mind that the Chair seat is currently "TEMPORARLY" being held by Mitchell.
I foresee that Steve Job will eventually step in as CEO of the Company.
We shall see a whole new Disney very soon.
First, Bob Iger's already proving himself by stepping up. In recent history, first with ABC and now all of Disney. He was hand-picked by Michael Eisner and the board is all people who looove Eisner. So, they will support him. Plus, he's already making great strides to improve Disney, so they will give him time to continue to prove himself. Look how long Eisner lasted. This is a board not given to quick action.
Secondly, Apple is still nimble. Pixar is incredibly nimble. Disney aint nimble. From cruise ships to theme parks to cable tv networks to licensed and O&O mall stores to ESPN to ABC, this is one large company with many, many levels of bureaucracy and its hand in many, many things.
Steve Jobs would be lost in the CEO position. Not because of a lack of talent or an inability to see the larger picture, but because of just how much crudwork is involved in keeping the amorphous blob on track. He would feel confined, trapped, unable to innovate. His mind zip-zaps around way too quickly to be mired in the mundane required to steer a ship of this size.
Plus, his passion for his pet projects, be they NeXT, Pixar or Apple. Who's to say how much passion he has for Disney? He has no hand in what Disney is today. To be sure, he will have a strong hand in what Disney going forward, but I think he'll stick to a role that allows him to innovate, be creative, bring together departments in new ways and so forth.
The only way he rises to the top of Disney is if they revive the shared structure that Eisner and Frank Miller(?) enjoyed where they played off each other, one focused on the money, the other on the creativity.
foundering company that Jobs formed after leaving Apple in
1988. The deal was the crowning career mistake of Gil Amelio,
Apple's chief executive at the time, who was desperate to
reverse a famously feckless tenure."
This might have been a mistake for Gil Amelio, but it was the
best thing that could have happened to Apple. Imagine the
Apple with Gil today? Where would they have been? Michael
Dell's words would have come true.
"But pardon my sarong if I don't believe everything Jobs says. He
is an executive of rare accomplishment. He also is a practiced
corporate finagler with large ambitions."
Which corporate magnet is not a "finagler"? Every corporate
magnet is. The only exception for Jobs (and a very few others) is
that he has "large ambitions."
So, let me understand the point here. Disney buys Pixar. Pixar
is a runaway success company. Disney is expected to "perform"
with this buy. But, if that doesn't happen, then someone has to
step up to the plate and get the company back on track. So, if
Iger "fails" to deliver, then why not have someone visionary step
up? What is wrong to replace a "failed" head? Looks like
mediocre living has become the norm of life these days!
Disney) into something bad... anything to generate hits.
Jobs taking over Apple again was a natural. It was his baby, his first company, one he was unceremoniously kicked out of. It was a natural for him to take it over again, and it's a real good thing he did. And it's clear that what he wants most is for Apple to succeed and not just as a career move.
Disney is something else. I have no doubt he will end up having significant input as Disney was well aware when the deal was formed. But Disney isn't his baby in any way. And I sincerely doubt he'll give up running Apple to run Disney. And I don't think he can run both. Running Disney would be much more effort than running Pixar was.
It's more likely that he will exert influence to protect the Pixar group and what they put out and also use that influence for more deals with Apple.
That is what people should be talking about, what does the new 'sisterhood' of Apple and Disney mean for everyone else.
Jobs will most likely bide his time, and play the good corporate executive role as long as things are going well. He will be plenty busy protecting and promoting his Pixar folks throughout Disney over the next few years, which includes the theme parks and other divisions, as was explicitly stated in the press release. You can bet your sweet bippy that the video iPod/ABC/ESPN/etc. connection will expand to every show that people would be willing to pay for, and I'm amazed that over three million TV show files have been downloaded (and, more importantly, paid for) already.
Steve may not be interested in running all of Disney this week, but I can't believe that he isn't already instructing his Pixar point-men/women, who will be spreading out through the rest of the company's management and technical strata, to report back directly to him their observations and recommendations. I do know I wouldn't want to be a long-time Eisner supporter who has stood in the way of Steve getting something done, whether it was Pixar film distribution, video iPod distribution, an animation project that competed with Pixar's, etc. Those guys/gals are probably already toast, if not outright plasma, at this point.
If/when the time is right, after Steve has had a chance to see who "gets it" and who doesn't, and if Iger and significant portions of the rest of Disney stumble (and the Pixar part doesn't, which is a possibility, although one of lower probability), then you can start your stopwatch on the Steve-as-Disney-CEO countdown. That's years away, though, at a bare minimum. And as someone pointed out, other than to satisfy even the yawning chasm that is his ego, why would Steve even want to risk being responsible for a bunch of boring legacy businesses he had no hand in building, when he can be plenty busy (and productive) for years pushing his/Pixar's (and, most assuredly, Apple's) agenda through the arteries of the Disney circulatory system, preparing for a takeover from the inside-out?
Oh, and BTW, it's corporate "magnate", not "magnet", although Steve's Reality Distortion Field may depend on magnetic force, courtesy of his personality or The Dark Side (which could be one and the same, but then, how could Bill Gates be the Emporer? :)
All the Best,
Joe Blow
"magnet", but I guess you turned off the spell checker after that,
huh?
- Much ado about nothing
-
by R. U. Sirius
January 26, 2006 10:10 AM PST
- Apple is Job's original vision, and no one can argue that he has reignited that company.
-
Reply to this comment
-
(28 Comments)I doubt he would ever give up the top post at Apple voluntarily, and why would he? If the market cap of Apple keeps moving skyward, at some point it can buy Disney in much the same way that Sony bought Universal.
I'm not dismissing what you're saying Coop, because anything is possible. But it seems to me that Apple is the one of the few shining stars in tech these days, and a lions share of that success is due to Steve Jobs. My bet is he wants bigger things for his company, not Walt's.