Episode 1: Pixar

[0] Okay, listeners now is a great time to thank one of our big partners here at Acquired, Service Now.

[1] Yes, ServiceNow is the AI platform for business transformation, helping automate processes, improve service delivery, and increase efficiency.

[2] 85 % of the Fortune 500 runs on them, and they have quickly joined the Microsofts at the NVIDias as one of the most important enterprise technology vendors in the world.

[3] And, just like them, Service Now has AI baked in everywhere in their platform.

[4] They're also a major partner of both Microsoft and Nvidia.

[5] I was at Nvidia's GTC earlier this year, and Jensen brought up ServiceNow and their partnership many times throughout the keynote.

[6] So why is ServiceNow so important to both Nvidia and Microsoft companies we've explored deeply in the last year on the show?

[7] Well, AI in the real world is only as good as the bedrock platform it's built into.

[8] So whether you're looking for AI to supercharge developers and IT, empower and streamline customer service, or enable HR to deliver better employee experiences, service now is the platform that can make it possible.

[9] Interestingly, employees can not only get answers to their questions, but they're offered actions that they can take immediately.

[10] For example, smarter self -service for changing 401K contributions directly through AI -powered chat, or developers building apps faster with AI -powered code generation, or service agents that can use AI to notify you of a product that needs replacement before people even chat with you.

[11] With ServiceNow's platform, your business can put AI to work today.

[12] It's pretty incredible that ServiceNow built AI directly into their platform.

[13] So all the integration work to prepare for it that otherwise would have taken you years is already done.

[14] So if you want to learn more about the ServiceNow platform and how it can turbocharge the time to deploy AI for your business, go over to ServiceNow .com slash acquired.

[15] And when you get in touch, just tell them Ben and David sent you.

[16] Thanks, service now.

[17] Welcome to the truth.

[18] Is it you?

[19] Is it you?

[20] Is it you?

[21] Is it you?

[22] Is it you?

[23] Is it you?

[24] Sit me down.

[25] Say it straight.

[26] Another story.

[27] Welcome to the first episode of Acquired.

[28] I'm Ben Gilbert.

[29] I'm David Rosenthal.

[30] And we're your hosts.

[31] We've recorded a pilot before this, but I'm not sure I'm comfortable letting that see the light of day.

[32] So this is our first real episode for the world to hear.

[33] We're going to start with a little background on ourselves.

[34] We'll talk about what the point of this podcast is, and then we'll get into the nuts and bold of the first episode.

[35] So I guess I'll start.

[36] I'm Ben.

[37] I'm the co -founder of Pioneer Square Labs here in Seattle, where we come up with companies and start them, prototype, and see if they work, and spin them out.

[38] I'm David.

[39] I'm a principal here at Madrona Venture Group.

[40] We're in an early stage venture capital firm in Seattle.

[41] We invest in technology startups that hopefully one day go on to be an acquirer or be an acquiree.

[42] Yeah.

[43] So it's funny.

[44] This is a podcast was something David and I were thinking up well.

[45] We were out drinking.

[46] As all good podcast start.

[47] And we kind of came to the conclusion of like, all right, let's try and make a list of companies that have been acquired where it was actually beneficial for the acquirer.

[48] And I think that there's so many examples of the opposite of like, boy, that was a huge write down.

[49] That was embarrassing.

[50] Or my God, that was an interesting valuation for someone that had no revenue.

[51] We'll see if it ever pans out.

[52] And I think that it's worth going back and highlighting really interesting tech companies that were acquired and ended up being kind of a one plus one equals three situation where it was actually a good investment in the future.

[53] I agree.

[54] And also interesting, perhaps, what could companies operating either as startups or independently take from why or why not, those companies worked?

[55] With that, should we hop into our first episode?

[56] I think we should.

[57] So the company that we have chosen as the acquiree is Pixar.

[58] And the company that obviously acquired Pixar was Disney.

[59] in 2006.

[60] And this isn't a typical, you know, straight, obvious technology acquisition.

[61] There's, there's a lot more to this, the storytelling aspect and the entertainment media production.

[62] It's really, really not a straight tech company when you look at it.

[63] And I think that's kind of what's going to make this a really interesting first episode.

[64] Totally.

[65] And Ben and I were chatting about this before we started recording.

[66] All of that is true.

[67] And yet, I think you could, you Pixar as like the first example of software eating the world.

[68] So we'll get more into it.

[69] So we're going to break this episode and potentially all future episodes into a couple sections.

[70] So first we're going to talk about the acquisition history and the facts.

[71] Then Ben and I are each going to put the acquisition into a category.

[72] What do we think was kind of the key piece of it and why the rationale behind why the acquiring company purchased the, this, this, this.

[73] acquisition target.

[74] Then we're going to talk about what might have happened had history been different.

[75] What if this acquisition hadn't gone through?

[76] And finally, we're going to assign each acquisition agreed.

[77] So let's start with the history and the facts.

[78] So January 2006, Pixar is a publicly traded company.

[79] Disney announces that they are acquiring it for $7 .4 billion, estimated roughly 45 times estimated Pixar earnings for that year.

[80] And Disney and obviously Pixar changed forever since.

[81] And famously, that is the day that Steve Jobs became the largest single shareholder of Disney stock, which Lerine Powell Jobs still holds as part of the estate.

[82] Led to a long relationship between Disney content and Apple technology products.

[83] Yeah, super interesting.

[84] That's probably outside the bounds of this episode.

[85] But one thing when we were planning for this episode, we didn't even think about is kind of ancillary benefits there of cooperation between Apple and Disney and revenue created for both companies.

[86] Totally.

[87] And so as we were researching kind of the background and history here, one stat that jumped out to me that I thought was just so cool, especially since we're focusing on technology acquisitions in this podcast, Pixar IPOed in 1995.

[88] You know what else IPOed in 1995?

[89] Netscape.

[90] Which do you think was the bigger IPO?

[91] Well, you're pausing the question, so I'm going to go Netscape.

[92] You would be wrong.

[93] Really?

[94] Pixar was the largest IPO of 1995, bigger than Netscape.

[95] Wow.

[96] That's not one that the history books often refer to.

[97] And I think if I'm getting, if my memory's right, also ended up being the larger acquisition.

[98] then Netscape, Pixar being $7 .4 billion, and I think Netscape was, I could be wrong here, but around $3 billion -ish.

[99] Is that to AOL?

[100] I think so.

[101] In the future, when there's actually people that listen to this podcast, we could totally have a chat room and they could be correcting us in real time, this could be great.

[102] But since David and I are both holding microphones and I haven't ordered stands yet, we'll leave the Googling to our fair readers.

[103] But I thought that was just totally cool, right?

[104] Here's this technology company being bought by a media company, much like Netscape was bought by AOL, which was then merged with Time Warner.

[105] And here is this technology company that ends up being both the largest IPO in this banner year and one of the most important acquisitions of all time.

[106] So after the acquisition in 2006, Disney and Pixar, as it was rebranded, has since then released several films.

[107] I believe, let's see, the list is Cars later in 2006, Ratatouille, Wally, Up, Toy Story 3, Cars 2, Brave, monsters university and inside out just going on box office stats alone so if you take worldwide box office for those films and subtract out production budgets for those films now that's not the total story on profits you know of course there is both on the revenue side additional revenue from merchandise from DVD sales from streaming and especially as part of Disney theme parks theme parks and then there's additional costs both in the cogs for those items but also in marketing costs both for the film and otherwise but just going with the numbers that we have publicly available those films since the acquisition have made just about seven and a half billion in revenue and about four and a half billion dollars of profit so 10 years later here we are $4 .5 billion of profit based on a $7 .4 billion acquisition price.

[108] It's kind of interesting.

[109] I mean, there's tons and tons of other ancillary benefits aside, but, you know, we could have a 15, the pace of their profits per film is accelerating.

[110] So he could have a 15 -year payback period on the acquisition.

[111] And I think, you know, we'll kind of get into this a little bit more, but just kind of looking at the spot that Disney was in, the spot that Pixar was in, if you could go to, you know, Disney exec at the time and say, you know, it's going to be 15 years before you really start seeing, you know, profits on top of this acquisition, but look at what Disney has been historically, the powerhouse of incredible animation and sort of that, the source of magic for children and adults alike.

[112] And kind of what happened to that since Toy Story 1?

[113] I mean, Pixar had the monopoly on magic and for creating.

[114] the most successful, incredible films in animation.

[115] And I think that, you know, is Disney sort of reacquiring its roots?

[116] And to me, you know, that the 15 -year price tag for that isn't too bad.

[117] Totally.

[118] And I think this is a great segue into the next section of our episode, which is, you know, how would you categorize this acquisition, you know, and some of the categories that we'd identified are, is this about people?

[119] Is this about technology?

[120] Is this a product that the acquirer is buying, a business line, or is it something else?

[121] Yeah.

[122] It's funny.

[123] There's certainly a people element, but it's not like they were repurposing these people on something.

[124] I think in a people acquisition, you typically talk about, you know, they wanted to really smart people to go to work on existing products with existing customers.

[125] That's certainly not the case, except with one specific person we can call out and probably other people we don't know about in the organization.

[126] technology, there's something there, but, you know, Pixar started by being a pure technology company and not having any animated films out there.

[127] They were just producing the Pixar computer with render man software on it, the ability for Lucasfilm and then for others to do 3D animation.

[128] And that's certainly.

[129] And I think this is, you know, before we render judgment on what category we'd put this acquisition into.

[130] I think that's a really important point that it's worth discussing.

[131] Like, Pixar is a technology company.

[132] And, you know, it was created as a division within Lucasfilm.

[133] There's a long history, even going back prior to Lucasfilm, but it really came together as an organization there to solve problems, you know, within Lucasfilm and be a technology enabler for George Lucas.

[134] And what's interesting is that, like, a lot of technology companies, it was then spun out by Steve Jobs and sold by Lucasfilm to Steve Jobs.

[135] And like a lot of technology companies, it started really small with what it could do with computer animation.

[136] It made short films.

[137] It was trying to push its technology to other film companies.

[138] Totally.

[139] And I mean, even before they were making short films, they were, they were purely that, that render man software on Pixar animation computer.

[140] And to your point, it's starting small, like the, ability for hardware to do this sort of thing at the time.

[141] If you go back and watch the Luxo Jr. Or the rotating hand, any of the really old Pixar animation stuff, it's so limited.

[142] And you can totally see.

[143] Even Toy Story.

[144] Oh, yeah.

[145] There's no faces in Toy Story.

[146] There's no human faces because it was too sophisticated at the time.

[147] People talk about big technology companies starting as toys.

[148] I mean, literally, Pixar didn't start with Toy Story, but their first big hit was toys.

[149] Yeah.

[150] Yeah.

[151] I mean, the thing we're actually talking about is, Is there, before the episode, is this just classic low -end disruption at play?

[152] I mean, the kind of famous story about John Lasseter is that he came to Pixar and to Ed Catmull was sort of this love for creating animation and not the technology of it, but the art of what kind of storytelling you could do with it.

[153] And I think I wrote this town, he was actually hired, Ed Catmell believed in him, but he wasn't allowed to hire animators.

[154] He was hired with the title of Interface Designer, and no one questioned Catmull's decision, but what John was doing was kind of on the side exploring the possibility of doing real storytelling in this incredibly limited medium.

[155] Totally.

[156] And I think also, if I'm getting my history right, Laster started his career at Disney.

[157] Yeah.

[158] And was an incredibly passionate Disney employee.

[159] It's all he ever wanted to do was be an animator there.

[160] And he was fired because he was espousing this new technology, this, this computer.

[161] animation, which people didn't believe would be capable of being part of the Disney way.

[162] It's so interesting to think about, you know, thinking about what we look at today that we laugh off as like, well, that'll never be good enough.

[163] That tech isn't, I mean, that's, that's laughable.

[164] How could you ever take that rotating hand and rival the power of Beauty and the Beast with that?

[165] Actually, Beauty and the Beast, nothing was out yet, but, you know, snow white or anything like that.

[166] And you can totally see how it just gets incrementally better.

[167] It gets better.

[168] It gets better every time.

[169] And it's one of those things where you have to check yourself when you're thinking, well, that can't possibly be the future.

[170] Like, look at VR today.

[171] The screen door effect, the lag, the price test.

[172] Like, everything about it, you're like, that is impossible.

[173] There's no way that ever reaches mass. And then, like, you know, some of these things die on the vine.

[174] But really, if you're going to win at some of these things, you get in early and it's a matter of time.

[175] And you grow with the medium and with the technology.

[176] And I think the other point, as I was thinking about this and Pixar as a technology company, is even with the short films, but especially with Toy Story, they embraced the limitations of the medium and yet delivered a full solution within it.

[177] You know, they didn't skimp on emotional connections within their movies, even when the technology was arguably inferior to both live action and traditional.

[178] animation.

[179] They were able to deliver incredible emotional experiences.

[180] And I think those are just hallmarks of all technology companies that are operating in new spaces and at the bleeding edge.

[181] It's cool to think about the things that they intentionally did because they would fit well into that medium.

[182] I mean, you look at Toy Story or Luxo Jr. I mean, these things were basic shapes, a ball where you could easily map a pattern onto it that's rolling and the lamp jumps on it.

[183] It's because it's so easy to render a sphere.

[184] And it's, you look at Brave.

[185] I mean, it took them 25, 30 years to do something like Brave, where they had to do this fierce, incredible hair, or cars where they had, you know, thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of vehicles flying around in the background and all this crazy stuff.

[186] They just, they knew that, or maybe John knew him, the team that was there early knew that the important thing was really communicating that story and picking whatever kind of visual representation they needed to fit the medium to still deliver that complete solution, as you put it.

[187] Yep.

[188] So that would argue that the technology, clearly a critical part of Pixar.

[189] Critical, but, you know, that Pixar was kicking the crap out of DreamWorks.

[190] I think that the computer animation hadn't become commoditized per se, but they weren't the only ones with it.

[191] Yep.

[192] So in terms of categorizing this acquisition, so I think, you know, for me, as I was thinking about this, I would actually put characterized Pixar best as a business line acquisition for Disney.

[193] And the reason I say that is twofold.

[194] One, it's interesting what Disney did with Pixar and looking at that almost as a blueprint with things like what Facebook's done with Instagram and with WhatsApp and with Oculus.

[195] they kept it completely separate.

[196] And this was, for the most part, driven by the Pixar side of the house.

[197] But the studios are in separate location.

[198] Disney animation is in Southern California.

[199] Pixar's in Northern California in the Bay Area.

[200] The teams are completely separate.

[201] There is no cross -pollination on projects.

[202] With the exception of the leadership.

[203] Yes.

[204] Which we can get to in a second.

[205] But really, Pixar has remained its own brain.

[206] and its own business line, quote -unquote, today.

[207] So that's reason one.

[208] Reason number two is, as I was reading about the acquisition, there's this great story I read that supposedly is true that Bob Eiger, the CEO of Disney, realized the new CEO of Disney when the company acquired Pixar, realized that he needed to buy Pixar, with which they had a film distribution deal in the past, when he was looking at a parade at a Disney theme park and all the characters in the parade and he realized that the characters that were developed in the past 10 years, none of them were Disney characters.

[209] All or almost all of them were Pixar characters.

[210] And that's when he realized Pixar needs to be an official whole, wholly owned part of Disney.

[211] Yeah.

[212] It is, it is interesting to think about the thing that made Pixar special is this really incredible studio thing that they had going that no one else had in the ability to produce movies and it wasn't you know when they talk about the big studios there's hits and misses there's big blockbuster hits that they put lots lots of money into and they just miss and the things that that Pixar has put out you know with the exception of cars too which is not necessarily critically acclaimed like every single one is a box office hit and nothing Pixar does sees the light of day unless it's wonderful I mean there's this emotional connection for kids and adults alike.

[213] And it's something where, you know, they have this really intense internal process where I think three or four directors over the course of their history have been fired in the middle of projects.

[214] They have this really incredible review of, you know, the kind of Pixar Brain Trust sitting around, reviewing milestones and watching early screenings.

[215] They have talent development where if there's a young promising director coming up, they do a short first and they kind of prove themselves.

[216] and the super signature shorts that Pixar does.

[217] And it's this process where, you know, when you think that, I think it's, I don't know if it's Christensen, or there's a very business school theory of the fact that what a business really is is people, processes, and priorities.

[218] And it was very, very clear at Pixar.

[219] And I think that the processes and the priorities had just as much to do with the acquisition as the people did in this case.

[220] Absolutely.

[221] And then John Lasseter and Ed Catmull, the principles at Pixar, aside from Steve Jobs, went on to assume control of all of animation within Disney.

[222] Yeah, and you look at, I mean, what Disney needed to learn to do was not ship crap.

[223] I mean, truly, like, only put out really wonderful films.

[224] And, you know, they're not to a Pixar level.

[225] yet when things have Pixar's name on it it's a it's a different level of quality but you know frozen wasn't Pixar that was Disney I mean that that was Disney learning from Laster Pixar the the process that they had there and and what you know computer animated joy looked like and how we we won't name names here well I'm not even going to go to being in Seattle but how much does that sound like technology companies, right?

[226] Don't ship crap.

[227] Yeah.

[228] And when technology companies go wrong, let's use Apple as, you know, a non -controversial example.

[229] There were a number of years in the wilderness when Apple was shipping crap.

[230] Yeah.

[231] Yeah, well, I'm sure we'll have many more episodes about Apple.

[232] But obviously the Steve Jobs thread runs deep in both of these companies.

[233] Yep.

[234] So, Ben, category for you.

[235] Oh, it's a business line.

[236] I mean, it's processes, but it's a business line.

[237] They're, you know, this is, this is not something that they're kind of like co -marketing to the same customer segment.

[238] This is not a thing where they're having the Pixar people at large work on Disney products.

[239] This is something where they have incredible respect for the existing Pixar business and they're keeping it separate.

[240] All right, listeners, our sponsor is one of our favorite.

[241] companies, Vanta, and we have something very new from them to share.

[242] Of course, you know Vanta enables companies to generate more revenue by getting their compliance certifications.

[243] That's SOC2, ISO -2 -2701, but the thing that we want to share now is Vanta has grown to become the best security compliance platform as you hit hypergrowth and scale into a larger enterprise.

[244] It's kind of wild.

[245] When we first started working with Vanta and met Christina, my gosh, they had like a couple hundred customers, maybe.

[246] Now they've got 5 ,000, some of the largest companies out there.

[247] It's awesome.

[248] Yeah, and they offer a tremendous amount of customization now for more complex security needs.

[249] So if you're a larger company, and in the past, you showed Vanta to your compliance department, you might have heard something like, oh, well, we've already got a compliance process in place, and we can't integrate this new thing.

[250] But now, even if you already have a SOC2, Vanta makes maintaining your compliance even more efficient and robust.

[251] they launched vendor risk management.

[252] This allows your company to quickly understand the security posture of the vendors that you're choosing in a standardized way that cuts down on security review times.

[253] This is great.

[254] And then on the customization front, they now also enable custom frameworks built around your controls and policies.

[255] Of course, that's in addition to the fact that with Vanta, you don't just become compliant once, you stay compliant with real -time data pulled from all of your systems, now all of your partner's systems, and you get a trust report page to prove it to your customers.

[256] If you click the link in the show notes here or go to vanta .com slash acquired, you can get a free trial.

[257] And if you decide you love it, you will also get $1 ,000 off when you become a paying customer.

[258] Make sure you go to vanta .com slash acquired.

[259] All right.

[260] Let's move on to, I think, a very interesting segment of our show, which is what would it happen otherwise?

[261] Let's say Disney didn't buy Pixar.

[262] Where would we be standing today?

[263] Or where would they be standing today?

[264] We'd probably still be right here in Seattle.

[265] I wouldn't be worried about Pixar, but I would be worried about Disney.

[266] I think that, you know, Pixar probably wouldn't have grown like it.

[267] It has having distribution into Disney's theme parks and a much more significant marketing budget behind it.

[268] But, you know, they had.

[269] a, they had a passionate, passionate following, and that wasn't, there was no small following.

[270] They were grossing over $100 million each film.

[271] Well over $100 million.

[272] Yeah, actually, I think, I think we just looked it up in.

[273] And Inside Out, most recent was, was, well, wait, profit or gross.

[274] Inside Out had revenues at, I think, 800 ,000, $800 million.

[275] Yeah, so Inside Out, which is, I believe, still in theaters.

[276] Some theaters, yeah.

[277] I tried to watch it this weekend.

[278] on my Apple TV, and I couldn't.

[279] So it's not on streaming yet.

[280] That is a weird period.

[281] So there's like this time where no one's allowed to watch it on anything.

[282] You know, total aside here, X number of years from now with X being like well less than 10.

[283] We're going to laugh at that.

[284] That is going to be ridiculous.

[285] Like, I was talking with my wife about this the other day.

[286] And I was like, you know, when we, we don't have kids yet.

[287] But someday, hopefully we'll have kids and, you know, they'll become culturally aware at some point hopefully and um you know one day we're going to jenny and i are going to be talking about television and our kids are going to look at us and say what's television yeah total aside there wild um so inside out uh which is still not you know run its course has uh grossed in worldwide box office over 800 million dollars had a 175 million dollar production budget so over 600 million dollars in profit yeah i mean so there there's there's disney magic there that yep um you know we can't say that's all pixar but really i think i think disney was a little bit lost um had a new CEO who had a clear vision um and i think that um i'd be a lot more worried about Disney than so what i'd say about this um i did two things i think on the Pixar side this really is a good example of, you know, the actually working in practice, the rationale that a lot of leadership teams of acquired companies will say, which often sounds hollow, which is that going with the acquirer will give you the scale to have an impact at the level much faster and much bigger at a level that you couldn't do standalone.

[288] That's in so many blog posts.

[289] totally right um but here i think it's really worked you know i mean cars land cars i don't know if ben if you've been to dsneyland recently i've been twice i think in the past couple years all you guys out there if you haven't been to carsland at disneyland in l .a you got to go it's amazing i'm booking tickets and and disney spent a billion dollars over a billion dollars creating carsland none of that would have happened if Pixar weren't part of Disney.

[290] So that's that side.

[291] And then I think on the Disney side, what's super interesting is that this kicked off really not just a transformation of Disney animation, but a whole transformation of how they thought about their IP and their entire film business.

[292] So since Pixar in 2006, they then acquired Marvel in 2009.

[293] And you only need look at, you know, The Avengers and Iron Man and Thor and Captain America and all those movies and the arguably, you know, superhero fad that we've been in recently, but they've made a ton of money from that.

[294] But then Lucasfilm a couple of years ago.

[295] And I don't know about you, Ben, but I am quite excited about this December.

[296] Do you buy your tickets yet?

[297] I've not bought my tickets yet.

[298] you know it's interesting they they really have put together a playbook for how to take a hugely successful franchise with a big following and then people that grew up on something and just has a special place in people's hearts and really just turn it into a machine i mean you look at the amount of star wars i mean there's obviously seven eight and nine but there's there's other films that are coming out there's new video i mean they've totally reinvigorated the franchise and taken the love that fan base and turned it into something that you know is is um Like, it's a uniquely Disney asset is their ability to amplify a franchise.

[299] Yeah.

[300] And what they've done with both Marvel and Star Wars, I think that Disney learned a lot from buying Pixar.

[301] And not, well, I don't know how not safe for work we want to make these podcasts, but not.

[302] I think we can't swear otherwise we will get the iTunes explicit tag.

[303] Ah, okay.

[304] Well, not, you know, F bombing up the creative process in, you know, in the process of doing this.

[305] And I think that's, that's something, would that have happened without Pixar, right?

[306] Like, you know, Marvel fans, I'm sure they're plenty out there who would argue that it's, you know, become too commercial and it's lost the, you know, whatever.

[307] But that would be a small minority.

[308] I mean, the Marvel comic book franchises now and movies are at such a better point, I would argue, than they were before the acquisition.

[309] And we'll see what happens with Star Wars this December.

[310] but like what if dix what if what if what if disney hadn't acquired pixar hadn't gone through that experience would they be equipped to digest marvel and lucas film in the same ways yeah it's interesting i mean that that's a yeah it's not an asset that pixar had but disney trains institutional muscle in learning how to do that successfully and that's um i mean that that's how you get these sort of one plus one equals three things where It wasn't an asset that either company had, but the process of the acquisition itself forced them to get good at a thing that would determine their future success.

[311] All right.

[312] I feel like it's time we should wrap up.

[313] Overall grade.

[314] We're going with A through F here.

[315] Disney, Pixar.

[316] What's your verdict?

[317] Well, David, we had our choice of picking any single acquisition in history of, in history of technology to do this.

[318] So, you know, I'm like looking for reasons.

[319] not to give it an A, but there's kind of a reason we picked it for our first episode.

[320] So thank you for the softball.

[321] I'm going to go with A. I'm going to disagree a little bit.

[322] Uh -oh.

[323] So, and I think this illustrates just how hard M &A is overall.

[324] You know, it's been 10 years since Disney acquired Pixar.

[325] Of course, for all those reasons that we were just talking about, incredibly successful, has transformed Disney.

[326] in many ways.

[327] No brainer that this was a great acquisition by Disney.

[328] On the other hand, you look at this financially, they spent $7 .5 billion for it.

[329] Now, they've probably, when you account for everything, which only the internal teams in Disney can and even then probably not fully, they've probably made that back, but it's been 10 years.

[330] So financially, you know, and I contrast that within 2000, Facebook was two years old at that point.

[331] And now what's Facebook market cap?

[332] I don't know.

[333] Whoa, so every acquisition is unsuccessful because it does not match the growth of one of the greatest technology companies of all time.

[334] Let's track the public markets as a, I mean, like, I'm self -justifying myself here why I'm more excited about being a venture investment.

[335] than I am about being working for M &A teams in public companies.

[336] Nothing wrong with working at M &A teams in public companies.

[337] So I guess where I'm going is I would hope that to get an A, this would have to be, something would have to be just such a grand slam on all levels that everybody can retire and be career making.

[338] And what's interesting is that even this, which is we picked it as the first acquisition of our show, it's hard to get much better than this on all levels and yet it's not totally clear that this has just turned into an incredible you know cash flow decision um as opposed to a you know investment in facebook in 2006 you give it a grade then i'll make a point i'm gonna give it a b plus maybe a minus we have we have pluses and minuses guys B plus slash A -minus.

[339] The thing that I think you're not taking into account, and I'll acknowledge my own bias here of being just absolutely enamored with Pixar, Toy Story defining my childhood.

[340] My A -Wall screen name was BJ Lightyear.

[341] Going deep here.

[342] Pixar has a very, very deep place in my heart.

[343] All that said, I think the thing that is not fact.

[344] into the financial decision is and actually we we don't really ever know what it would look like otherwise but the long -term success in health of Disney I mean what would that look like without Pixar what does Disney look like 20 years from now without Pixar well and here's a question which we answered in the what would have happened otherwise but um is there a Pixar land if there's not Disney Pixar get cat mall the phone.

[345] All right, with that, thanks for tuning in.

[346] We'll see you next time.

[347] Have you night, guys.

[348] VJ's story is amazing.

[349] Before founding Statsig, VJ spent 10 years at Facebook where he led the development of their mobile app ad product, which, as you all know, went on to become a huge part of their business.

[350] He also had a front row seat to all of the incredible product engineering tools that let Facebook continuously experiment and roll out product features to billions of users around the world.

[351] Yep.

[352] So now Statsig is the modern version of that promise.

[353] and available to all companies building great products.

[354] Statsig is a feature management and experimentation platform that helps product teams ship faster, automate AB testing, and see the impact every feature is having on the core business metrics.

[355] The tool gives visualizations backed by a powerful stats engine unlocking real -time product observability.

[356] So what does that actually mean?

[357] It lets you tie a new feature that you just shipped to a core metric in your business and then instantly know if it made a different, difference or not in how your customers use your product.

[358] It's super cool.

[359] Statsig lets you make actual data -driven decisions about product changes, test them with different user groups around the world, and get statistically accurate reporting on the impact.

[360] Customers include Notion, Brex, OpenAI, FlipCart, Figma, Microsoft, and Cruise Automation.

[361] There are like so many more that we could name.

[362] I mean, I'm looking at the list, Plex and Vercel, friends of the show at Rec Room, Vanta.

[363] They literally have hundreds of customers.

[364] now.

[365] Also, Statssig is a great platform for rolling out and testing AI product features.

[366] So for anyone who's used Notions' awesome generative AI features and watched how fast that product has evolved, all of that was managed with Statsig.

[367] Yep.

[368] If you're experimenting with new AI features for your product and you want to know if it's really making a difference for your KPI's Statsig is awesome for that.

[369] They can now ingest data from data warehouses.

[370] So it works with your company's data wherever it's stored so you can quickly get started no matter how your feature flagging is set up today.

[371] You don't even have to migrate from any current solution you might have.

[372] We're pumped to be working with them.

[373] You can click the link in the show notes or go on over to stat sig .com to get started.

[374] And when you do, just tell them that you heard about them from Ben and David here on Acquired.