You must log in or register to comment.

Silicon_Knight t1_iy4ivv6 wrote

I don’t get the Apple rumour. They won’t want to own theme parks but I could see a long term agreement on content distribution. Inverse Pixar lol.


Neo2199 OP t1_iy4jpf2 wrote

Bog Iger was a close friend to the late Apple co-founder and CEO Steve Jobs, he spoke a few times in the past about Disney/Apple merging.

Bob Iger says Apple & Disney would have merged if Steve Jobs was alive - Dec 21, 2021

> In an interview with CNBC on Tuesday, Iger noted that Jobs was passionate about "everything that Disney did." He said the late Apple co-founder and CEO always appreciate combining "great technology" with "great creativity."

> "The intersection — one side liberal arts, one side technology," Iger said. "That's what made his heart sing."

> Iger continued, adding that Disney's content would have been a natural fit for the way that Apple was changing how it delivers content to users.

> "I'm pretty convinced we would have had that discussion," Iger said. "I think we would have gotten there."

> This is not the first time that Iger has brought up the potential of an Apple-Disney merger if Jobs had lived. In his 2019 memoir, Iger said that he believed "if Steve were still alive, we would have combined our companies, or at least discussed the possibility very seriously."


Silicon_Knight t1_iy4ruw9 wrote

Yes I read his book too quite a good read. Technically Iger was friends with Jobs wife and that relationship extended to Jobs eventually. I think Jobs would have but I didn’t say Jobs, I said Apple.

I stand by that I don’t think Apple would want to run a theme park today.


browncharliebrown t1_iy9rsvi wrote

Apple running the parks would actually be quite interesting. Something like magic bands being fully replaced with Apple Watches. Or maybe apple improving computer systems for rides


Yindeenia01 t1_iya7hoa wrote

Then they could give me a portion of the company. That would be the best day in history.


Silicon_Knight t1_iya7ltu wrote

You can purchase a portion of the company on the stock market.


Yindeenia01 t1_iya8iu5 wrote

I meant acquiring all Pixar and then some. I would definitely love to run a theme park. But the stock market is a great place to start.


Flynn58 t1_iyalndw wrote

I mean they could create a larger corporate umbrella while keeping Apple and Disney separate business units with their own management.


InformationLow4050 t1_iy5dgbj wrote

Wasn’t Jobs chairman of Disney before he passed?


Neo2199 OP t1_iy5ewmk wrote

He was a member of Disney's board and the largest shareholder as well.


AveryLazyCovfefe t1_iy5ko6u wrote

He did have a huge influence on early Pixar I believe. Which is why there are references to him quite a bit throughout Pixar movies, such as some characters in movies using iPhones or other apple products.


griswald123 t1_iy5t6zf wrote

I mean he founded Pixar… so ya. Haha


throwaway12junk t1_iy5xegg wrote

Not Jobs, George Lucas.

Pixar was created to design custom hardware for what we now call CGI. After Jobs was forced out of Apple in 1985, he bought Pixar from Lucasfilms to create a rival computer company. It failed largely because the brains behind the actual hardware was Steve Wozniak; Jobs was the marketing man.

This failure prompted Jobs to reverse Pixar back to CGI R&D. Around the same time they hired John Lasseter who was fired from Disney for promoting CG animation. On the brink of bankruptcy, Jobs let Lassiter do whatever he wanted. So he created Toy Story.

The financial success of that film, Apple failing without Jobs, and secret bankrolling from Warren Buffett allowed Jobs to return to Apple and set the stage for iTunes and iPod, later culminating into the iPhone and iPad.


seakingsoyuz t1_iy919wp wrote

Your first paragraph is merging NeXT and Pixar, which were entirely separate companies.


griswald123 t1_iy5zq5j wrote

Founded the Pixar we know today. He made them what they are. I guess founded isn’t technically correct. More like what Elon did with Tesla. Yes he didn’t found it, but bought and brought it to what it is today. Know one would know Pixar as we do a household name today if it wasn’t for Jobs.


AveryLazyCovfefe t1_iy5tbsa wrote

I thought those were mere fables haha. Absolutely can see how Apple has had an impact on Disney now.


tr3v1n t1_iy5wyer wrote

Pixar existed for years as part of ILM. Eventually George Lucas wanted to spin it off and that is where Steve Jobs comes in. He bought into it securing a controlling share. Calling this founding it seems weird to me since it was a thing without him. He was an investor.


griswald123 t1_iy5tmg3 wrote

Walter Issacson’s biography on Jobs is great. Highly recommend. Amazing what was going on in that man’s brain.


Pristine-Today4611 t1_iy7t4a3 wrote

Only way that would have happened is if Steve Job was given control of the whole company. Steve Jobs was a perfectionist he would never let someone else or any board dictate what he did.


Brainiac7777777 t1_iyaxsac wrote

This is not true at all. Bob Iger was the Chairman of the Board of Apple


Rumbleinthejungle8 t1_iy4owhp wrote

It would have made sense a few years ago, having Apple develop Disney+ (who has a lot more experience developing software) and bundling it with iPhones and whatnot.


Worthyness t1_iy4xp1q wrote

If Jobs was still alive it might legitimately have been a thing. Jobs and Iger and Disney have been intertwined heavily for a long time. But once Jobs passed it probably stopped being a thing on the table


bigboygamer t1_iy6hsb5 wrote

If Jobs were still alive you'd get an over priced streaming service with very few but very good shows.


__theoneandonly t1_iy78b1v wrote

Isn’t that exactly what Apple TV+ is meant to offer today? For $7/month or whatever it is now, you get a small selection of high-budget original content.


bigboygamer t1_iy7q5fq wrote

Yeah but overall it's an underwhelming experience.


__theoneandonly t1_iy8dg0p wrote

I guess that’s an opinion. I thought it was underwhelming during the 12-month free trial. But it’s hard to be underwhelmed by something that’s free. Then the 12 free months turned into 21 free months because of COVID delaying all their productions.

Now I feel like they have as many originally shows that I’m actively watching (meaning I’m either watching, they’re in my to-watch list, or I’m waiting for a new season to come out) as any of the other streamers.


velsor t1_iy4xqct wrote

It wouldn't have made sense a few years ago either. Buying Disney is the exact opposite of the content strategy Apple has been pursuing since 2017.

Buying the old TimeWarner (mainly to get HBO) would have made more sense for Apple, but even that is far too big an acquisition for Apple to have been interested.


Rumbleinthejungle8 t1_iy54m52 wrote

Maybe a full aquicistion would have been too much, but a partnership or something where they helped develop Disney+ and get new suscribers while sharing revenue with Disney for providing the content.

Disney is more mainstream and has broader appeal than HBO, seems like better content for Apple.


FanofK t1_iy70icf wrote

Disney already had BAMTech so they had a company with the expertise.


Radulno t1_iy4zvkj wrote

Yeah I really think they should have got it before Discovery (because now the Discovery part don't interest them).


Worthyness t1_iy5f3dj wrote

Should have taken Fox while it was up for grabs. Easily could have outbid Disney and Comcast and would have given them the IP they need for their streaming service


Radulno t1_iy5gr9h wrote

To be fair, I'm happy they don't have IP. They might be the only ones to actually do new things (though adaptations of new stuff still count as IP I guess but it's different).

HBO would just have suited their prestige programming very well. And they also had IP with that of course including probably the biggest in TV with Game of Thrones.


3758232352 t1_iy5697o wrote

No it wouldn’t. Disney bought BAMtech for the software side of things.


n0t-again t1_iy84x1u wrote

It would have made sense while Steve was the majority shareholder in Disney but we all know how that story goes...


naynaythewonderhorse t1_iy55m7y wrote

As a fan of both companies (yeah, I’m a sheep or whatever you wanna call me) a merger would be absolutely horrifying.


Shapen361 t1_iy58dln wrote

No way FTC would let Apple and Disney pass. If anything, Apple would have to sell off its media division from Services to Disney, which would be a bad move for them.


unkDelawareunk t1_iy72r6q wrote

The Microsoft/Activision merger is about to fail due to antitrust concernes, these talks about a Disney-Netflix, Disney-Apple mergers are laughable. Disney also needs money if it wants to buyout Comcast's interest in Hulu and merge it with Disney+.


Shapen361 t1_iy74l9w wrote

Nothing has changed for the Microsoft-Activision merger except for a rumor story on Politico. I don't see why the FTC should block it if Microsoft keeps COD cross-console. Sony has way more and better exclusives, and it wouldn't make Microsoft a monopoly in mobile games. It really would just come down to Lina Khan trying to assert her authority.


[deleted] t1_iy8pgtp wrote



Trot1995 t1_iyblc0c wrote

I admit I don't follow the gaming scene closely anymore, but in what way is activation a monopoly they make a few bad games every year.


[deleted] t1_iyd2l13 wrote



Trot1995 t1_iyd3kyl wrote

I have no idea what microsoft game pass is or why it's a problem. Nor do I see how it would drive people from the market. Steam still dominates the computer gaming space. And Sony and Nintendo aren't going to exit the space.


LumpyCamera1826 t1_iy7mc4t wrote

It's still unlikely that it is going to fail. Probably going to have some concessions but doubt it will fail


ronearc t1_iy5f0an wrote

Apple has a stupid amount of available cash on the books, and unless they're run by idiots (they're not), they're eyeballing a lot of big merger and acquisition opportunities which would allow them to divest substantially from their current position which is almost singularly dependent upon continued cooperation from China.

Any companies that can offer them that may be in their M&A sights. I've been concerned for awhile that they might gobble up Disney, and I'd hate that. While Disney isn't exactly the poster-child for responsible corporate behavior, they're better by a long stretch than Apple.


smokeyjay t1_iy5k5yz wrote

The nice thing about Apple is that they usually don't blow all their money on dumb acquisitions. I think Beats was their biggest acquisition and that was 3 billion. For a tech company, there pretty cost discipline.


ronearc t1_iy5lgbu wrote

Yes, but their cash-on-hand has shrunk dramatically over the last few years. Now that may be an indicator of reason for them not to use their ready cash for an acquisition.

But interest rates have also risen, and borrowing money for a big acquisition would be cost prohibitive. They also draw criticism among shareholders for not making better use of their cash reserves.

Their factories in China are fighting a constant war of protest and disruption of late. China itself is becoming more volatile.

I think there may be a sense among some major investors that Apple has a very real need to diversify their potential profit streams.

Maybe they hoard their cash against the coming storm. Or maybe they spend a big chunk of it acquiring a company so large that the acquisition may lift them both, but for that to work, they'd need to acquire a company so solid, no one doubts their future is bright.


smokeyjay t1_iy5n5bt wrote

Investors don't mind. There the only big tech company that actually buys back shares, and not to offset stock based compensation. They've always had massive cash reserves.

They also have AR/VR that may come out next year. And there doing the apple car thing as well. They've been diversifying away from hardware and doing more subscriptions and tying customers into their ecosystem.

I always thought Apple should buy Peloton if they could get it for 2 billion. I see a lot of synergy with the bike, apple watch, air pods, apple music, and apple subscription. The bike is basically an ipad attached to a bike anyways.


DaveShadow t1_iy659zq wrote

I presume this is why they’ve been linked with Manchester United this week too.


sgthombre t1_iy4oi1p wrote

Also it was being pitched as an ego thing for him but that seemed really backward to me, does he want his legacy to be buying two major media prosperities and then selling the company years later?


TraptNSuit t1_iy55h5n wrote

Yeah, the man who killed Disney is what he would become. Disney as a subsidiary of Apple is not the same thing at all. Maybe everyone would make scads of money, but that's really not the same and it would pretty much be the death of Walt's dream then and there.


Radulno t1_iy4zlrr wrote

Content distribution of what? They both have their streaming service already...


Silicon_Knight t1_iy50auq wrote

For now. It’s not like they couldn’t partner and shut down D+ with a free transition to AppleTV+


Barfstool_Sports t1_iy51gqq wrote

lol they would not shut down D+ in favor of Apple TV+


Silicon_Knight t1_iy521ie wrote

I didn’t say they would, I said they could. I’m sure other models can exist like bundle deals etc… I’m simply saying just because there are two offerings it doesn’t mean there can’t be more. Look at Disney with Hulu.


kaenneth t1_iy5puue wrote

I had Hulu separate from Disney, but they recently forced the account to merge for some reason...


Rosebunse t1_iy50kap wrote

In a book Iger said he discussed the merger with Steve Jobs. Ever since there have been rumors that Disney wants to merge with Apple. I mean, maybe they do, but there are a lot of reasons for them not to.


Silicon_Knight t1_iy51rz0 wrote

Yes I read the book but he explicitly said “if Steve was still alive we may have…”. I’m not talking about what could have been I’m talking about Apple of today. I still don’t think they would want to be in that industry. They want the content.


UnnamedArtist t1_iy77sdh wrote

I’d actually expect Apple to buy Warner. Instant catalogue. DC, HBO, looney toons, etc.


travio t1_iy9is07 wrote

That, or Sony. With Sony, they get content but also get into the console game, and more importantly, they get into VR with Sony's upcoming PSVR 2 platform.


Stephen_Gawking t1_iy4n1g2 wrote

I’m interested to see how avatar 2 does. It looks great but I’m not sure how many will show up in theaters for it. Probably shouldn’t bet against James Cameron though.


bubbib2 t1_iy4rx3g wrote

> Probably shouldn’t bet against James Cameron though.



RandomJPG6 t1_iy5htvx wrote

Not to mention it's three hours long so they can't fill up as many screenings. But they also have the Chinese box office.

I'm guessing it will end up at least making it to the top five. It will just start in theaters for a long time.


musicman2018 t1_iy6029y wrote

I worked at a small family-owned theater. When Avengers: Endgame came out, they just took up theaters and had a show every ~1-1.5 hours. I’m sure it was like this at bigger chains as well. Surely the theaters will do the same with Avatar


travio t1_iy9iwfi wrote

With everything going on in China right now, I wonder how big their box office will be.


okcrumpet t1_iy50ms8 wrote

I’m waiting to hear if the story is better than the first as I was incredibly bored for the first movie. Visuals were great, but I’m not much of a nature guy so they alone didn’t do it for me.

But I’m sure I’m in the minority. This thing will cross a billion easy. Cameron has said it needs $2B to break even though, so that’s the real question


goliathfasa t1_iy58wxp wrote

It’s an event. That’s like saying Top Gun 2 has a weak story. These aren’t films with scripts that’ll be analyzed for decades to come. They have serviceable plot that brings the spectacle of the theater experience.


okcrumpet t1_iy5a3c4 wrote

Most event movies still have solid story and characters. Top gun had good characters and so it told a simple story well. Avatar did not have even that to elevate its simple plot and dialogue, purely visuals and worldbuilding.

For me the worldbuilding didn’t resonate, so I found it boring. For most, it may be enough. It certainly was last time.


goliathfasa t1_iy5d18h wrote

I didn’t find it too engaging either. But it was just enough to make the experience a positive one. I never understood the wide appeal of the Bayformer movies, but they are massive and lucrative and I suppose it just works for the masses.


Tight-Session1558 t1_iy54e3p wrote

To get that I think they would need the Asian market.


RandomJPG6 t1_iy5ho4z wrote

It got approved for China


Tolkien-Minority t1_iy5j719 wrote

China has a lot going on right now so they might not generate the box office you’d expect


Stephen_Gawking t1_iy5na69 wrote

Yeah between covid lockdowns and American films underperforming at the Chinese box office, I’m not sure how much they’ll move the needle.


bongo1138 t1_iy77v54 wrote

Lol I bet that’s why they’re protesting. They don’t wanna miss the new Avatar movie.


thenerdal t1_iy5f560 wrote

Should be better. The writers have a decent track record compared to the first which was just Cameron


Maninhartsford t1_iy5prdi wrote

Aliens and Terminator 2 are both fantastic, I'm hoping his magic sequel touch strikes again


Worthyness t1_iy62doc wrote

well considering Avatar is like his pet project for a few decades, I have high hopes


scyber t1_iy6i0jr wrote

They shot most of the next 2 films at once. Which means they probably need $2b over the next two films to break even. Which is difficult, but not as impossible as earning that for one film.


fdbryant3 t1_iy78eqs wrote

He didn't say that. He that it would need to be a top 4 or 5-grossing movie. What he didn't specify is if that is worldwide or domestic. I really doubt there is a studio in the world that would greenlight a move that needs $2B so he was probably thinking domestic which would be a much more reasonable yet still high for a movie break even around $800M .


sleevieb t1_iy68ug5 wrote

They asked Cameron to adapt Dune.

He declined. Told them he wasn’t ready to be emporer.


cyainanotherlifebro t1_iy4ykm6 wrote

Is Walt Disney still frozen tho?


BuckyFnBadger t1_iy5xhsi wrote

They really need to start enforcing anti trust laws


Neo2199 OP t1_iy4i9ey wrote

> The 71-year old executive also said that the hiring freeze his pink slipped predecessor Bob Chapek announced on November 11 is still in place. Offering his perspective from being outside the company the past year after decades at Disney, Iger told staffers additionally that rumors of a merger or deal with Apple were just that – rumors. The man who bought Pixar, Marvel, Lucasfilm and Fox for Disney during his last stint as CEO also noted that the House of Mouse wasn’t looking to make anymore big ticket acquisitions any time soon.

> Coming just over a week after Iger was returned to his perch at the House of Mouse and Chapek was unceremoniously shown the door, the once and current CEO’s attempt to rally the Disney troops comes at a precarious time for the media giant. On one hand, Disney has the top movie in the world with Black Panther sequel Wakanda Forever. However, this past weekend also saw the company take a more than $100 million thump with the box office crash and burn of animated feature Strange World. In that context, the December 16 release of James Cameron’s much anticipated Avatar: The Way of Water poses potentially more big screen success and financial stress for the studio.

> Quickly purging the upper ranks of Disney of the short-lived Chapek’s top lieutenants in the hours after being renamed CEO unexpectedly on November 20, the notoriously successor-uncongenial Iger also has a 24 month deadline to leave the company in stable hands – an effort that floundered from almost the get-go with Chapek.

> Somewhat anti-climatic, according to one source, the 40-minute town hall today found Iger sidestepping Florida’s discrimatory “Don’t Say Gay” law that tripped up a flip-flopping Chapek earlier this year. Essentially, noting you can’t please all the people all the time, Iger said the matter shouldn’t be a political issues, we hear.


PointOfFingers t1_iy5cf4t wrote

If there is a hiring freeze how were they able to hire Bob Iger? 🤔


ptwonline t1_iy5vesr wrote

Strange World seems to have had poor marketing. Barely saw any tv or online ads for it, and didn't get enough info on it to understand what is was about or why I should be interested.


wikiwombat t1_iy6fl3h wrote

And it was released the following week of black panther, if that wasnt a death sentence, I dont know what is


nayapapaya t1_iy8qth1 wrote

Black Panther has been out for 3 weeks.


wikiwombat t1_iy8utw6 wrote

November 11th vs November less than 2 weeks apart for the release dates.


DemonGroover t1_iy6me67 wrote

The only info i got was that it had the first openly gay teen. That seemed to be Disney's amazing marketing strategy.


fdbryant3 t1_iy77ebl wrote

I don't get this, I saw ads on YouTube and TikTok for weeks.


Harkiven t1_iy729jq wrote

That last paragraph is misrepresenting what he was asked. He was asked if Disney should be less political, he responded that things that people think are political should not be, giving full support to LGBTQ employees.


D-luxxxx t1_iy5906r wrote

I don’t get what Apple could do with this and their tech unless they plan on changing their entire media outlet. Or requiring Apple + to watch the next MCU movie.

Would make for an interesting acquisition if greenlit though.


timshel_life t1_iy6qy2v wrote

Every Disney movie/show would be an Apple commercial


on_ t1_iy5o983 wrote

No way apple + Disney would be allowed by anti trust


bongo1138 t1_iy77qz0 wrote

It would be interesting considering they’re operating mostly in different markets.


OrangeJr36 t1_iy4mb3f wrote

It will take a long time to assess decisions under Chapek. As with any management shake-up they aren't just going to turn around and announce huge changes as long as they have investors to re-assure.


MrLyle t1_iy57ko2 wrote

Merging with Apple? Apple can buy Disney today if they felt like it. With cash. That’s how much bigger Apple is compared to Disney.


postjack t1_iy5fbu0 wrote

not quite i don't think. disney's net worth is ~$99bill, Apple has about ~$48bill in cash and cash equivalents/short term investments. still a staggering amount of liquidity though.


PugsyBogues t1_iy5ha7p wrote

Last I saw Apple had over 200B in cash


WR810 t1_iy5p3cn wrote

That's what I thought too but I just looked it up and Apple does indeed only have $forty-something billion.


iamse7en t1_iy70iqp wrote

That's cash on hand. They have liquid, short and longer term investments that can easily be converted to cash. It was around $200B a year or so ago, but it is getting smaller.


WR810 t1_iy9189j wrote


iamse7en t1_iy91gln wrote

I know, it's a good article to show you the difference between cash on hand, and all liquid investments that can easily be converted to cash. You're only counting "cash on hand."


WR810 t1_iy91lu0 wrote

> Cash on hand can be defined as cash deposits at financial institutions that can immediately be withdrawn at any time, and investments maturing in one year or less that are highly liquid and therefore regarded as cash equivalents and reported with or near cash line items.

Edit: Cash on hand doesn't just mean dollars in the vault.


iamse7en t1_iy92ced wrote

You’re still missing all marketable securities that can also be easily converted to cash, which is what people are saying when “Apple has $200B in ‘cash.’”

> [Apple] had more than $200 billion in cash and marketable securities at the end of the last quarter…


NoMisterBond t1_iy7z9j1 wrote

Kill off Genie+, bring back FastPass and the Magical Express, and be hailed a conquering hero.


werdnak84 t1_iy6axum wrote


*chaos breaks out in the meeting room*


WitloofDSV t1_iy80ud4 wrote

Can some1 ELI5 why disney is in “bad shape” and needs hiring freezes etc.? Arent they one of the wealthiest and most successful companies to have ever existed in the space they’re in?


notallwhowander707 t1_iyb0yzd wrote

Disney+ lost $4 billion this year alone and is not expected to be profitable until 2024. Many films this year have struggled to gain box office traction (in part because of their theatrical/Disney+ strategy), and while the theme parks are very profitable, most people agree that Chapek has nickel and dimed guests to an extreme and many longtime fans have turned against the parks.

Iger also saddled the company with $100 billion in debt before he left (purchasing Fox) and they haven't done much of anything with the Fox division in the years since the purchase.


Inspiredrationalism t1_iy8bska wrote

Why do people think the merger with Apple is even an option . No antitrust body will allow that. Republicans all hate both Apple and Disney and Democrats have become at least semi serious about antitrust ( finally).

Frankly there is a better case to be made for breaking up both companies ( Apple in general, forcing Disney to get rid of ESPN).


clg_wrath2 t1_iy8orht wrote

I know a lot of people dont understand why a company like Apple would be interested in disney. I'll give a few reasons why now below.

  1. Right now Hollywood is going through a bit of a crisis mode. People arent flocking back to theaters like pre covid, most streaming services are net losers atm and a major recession is on the horizon. This means studios or media type companies might become the cheapest they've ever been and CEOs will be looking for an easy way to get investors money.

  2. Right now there are two major industries connecting people throughout the world. Tech and media. Movies/shows are a huge part of media that people connect to and the tech revolution of the past 100 years allows anyone in the world to connect with each other. Apple a tech company would naturally want to control both pathways, connection by tech and media.

  3. IP is hugely valuable long term. IP itself doesnt make much profit but it can enhance something else to drive that profit extremely high, AKA disney and themeparks.

  4. Holding that IP might be something that makes a plan easier and more profitable down the road in 25-50 years. Buy it cheap now and use it to sell some type of experience later in time that will be a tech revolution paired with IP content people love and remember


stnlkub t1_iy6qno0 wrote

This sort of goes back to when NeXT was picked up and became a trend, though not exclusive to Apple. Apple buys talent. Often that talent comes with IP but that’s just a perk. They are and have most been a ‘hit’ culture of a company - like Disney. They iterate in one hit long enough for the next big thing. Jobs would have liked the synergy of creatives being Disney and Apple building the tech - the two sides that inspire each. The problem is hits take a lot of time, patience and investment and Tim Cook - who I believe wholeheartedly buys this idea - was logistics and knows to pay for a hit, you have to pay the bills. Streaming is volatile and I think Apple decided the cost to be in that market was worth paying. I also think you’ll see a consolidation of these streaming platforms eventually because at some point even House of Dragons 16 XL Pro isn’t going to be enough for a channel to survive.


davwad2 t1_iy863nf wrote

They hired Iger! So they can hire a new CEO but bot other positions!!!



LeoLaDawg t1_iyccqgj wrote

If Apple buys Disney and prevents me from watching on my android I..... will bitch.


houseofwaldorf t1_iy6wzo3 wrote

He also said he's mandating rainbow-fro clown wigs and pink hot pants for all employees, they are merging with Chrysler and buying Penthouse Magazine


LoPanDidNothingWrong t1_iy5f1p1 wrote

Disney would not be a good fit for Apple IMO. Too much mediocre crap.

Nintendo is one which fits really well with Apples family friendly casual gaming vibe.


kaenneth t1_iy5qt9z wrote

walled garden hardware and heavy DRM in particular; having Classic/Current Nintendo games on Apple platforms (legally...), join the chip design teams, etc. could be a lot of synergy.

But, they way they both like to do their own thing so much it would make working together hard.


Hot_Librarian_8748 t1_iy5xgli wrote

I actually think Disney + Nintendo could be a thing. Both are in the family friendly zone. It’s my understanding that Disney has shed most of it homegrown video game teams. Disney excels at force multiplying it’s IP but would be hard pressed to add “studio” IP due to antitrust issues. So they could gain additional IP from Nintendo.

But Nintendo is not a struggling company so they will cost a premium and I’m not sure how compatible corporate cultures are.


Worthyness t1_iy62i7c wrote

Nintendo also went with Universal to man their animated movies and to help establish their theme park


Hot_Librarian_8748 t1_iy64sf7 wrote

Yes I would say those collaborations show that Nintendo could of benefited with merging with Disney in exploiting their IP. But now one of Disney’s contemporaries are benefiting from this partnership.


LupinThe8th t1_iy5pdku wrote

>Disney would not be a good fit for Apple IMO. Too much mediocre crap.

Yeah, and Disney makes some as well.