
UPDATES Disney Buying Marvel For $4B!
EXCLUSIVE: The first thing you should know is that Bob Iger has comic books in his blood. And the second thing you should know is that his ties to Marvel go back two generations. His late great-uncle (his grandfather's brother) was illustrator/cartoonist Jerry Iger, who partnered with illustrator/cartoonist Will Eisner back in the 1930s to create -- you guessed it -- the comic book packager Eisner & Iger Studios. I couldn't make up this stuff if I tried... (Blackthorne Publishing has released three compilations of Jerry Iger-related comics: The Iger Comics Kingdom, Jerry Iger's Classic Jumbo Comics, Jerry Iger's Classic National Comics, and Jerry Iger's Golden Features. Will Eisner is no relation to Michael Eisner.)
And their first hire was Jack Kirby, who as you know later became the co-creator of many of Marvel's best known characters with Stan Lee. So Bob Iger had an unusually rich appreciation for the comic book biz dating back to his childhood when his great-uncle would draw for him. Fast forward to Monday's Disney-Marvel deal, which I've learned was 10 years in conception, and three months in negotiation between Iger and Ike Perlmutter for the 7,000 Marvel characters -- that's right, 7,000, not the 5,000 number every media outlet keeps reporting including me.
I'm told that, back in the 1990s, when Michael Eisner ran Disney and Bob Iger was his No. 2 (a teaming I liked to call FrankenEisner and Igor back then), the moguls had on-again, off-again coversations about acquiring Marvel. But there was never any attempt at a negotiation because "the brand didn't seem Disney," as a source tells me. Once Iger took over Disney as CEO, and recently embarked on its stock buyback, the Big Media company found itself sitting on excess cash even after investing in Pixar and everything else. That's when the troika of Iger, Tom Staggs, Sr EVP/CFO, and Kevin Mayer, EVP of Corporate Strategy, Business Development and Technology Group, stepped up their look for growth opportunities. And Marvel came up again, this time much more seriously. Iger even discussed this directly with his division heads. It's a testament to Disney's limitless penchant for secrecy that even though about a dozen people knew Disney had decided to go after Marvel, there was no leak.
In June, Iger flew to New York to meet with CEO Ike Perlmutter in his Marvel office. In a show of transparency, Iger had already let the wily but no-nonsense Israeli (who'd beaten back two billionaires, Ron Perelman and Carl Icahn, for control of Marvel) know that Disney was interested in buying Marvel and wanted to start negotiating. ("It would have been manipulative if I'd approached it any other way," Iger told a pal. "You know how that goes. Someone invites you for dinner. And, after a glass of wine, he tells you he wants to buy you. And the wine never tastes quite as good after that.")
But Perlmutter expressed little interest in a deal, even though he liked Disney and all that the name, company, branding, implied. "I've heard good things about Disney. But I don't need to sell. I don't want to sell," Perlmutter told Iger, according to my insiders. But, eventually, Iger got to the heart of Perlmutter's objection: Ike didn't want to retire. He wanted to continue to work because Marvel was what he loved.
As due diligence went on, Disney saw nothing in Marvel's books that indicated Marvel was under financial pressure or Perlmutter had any need to sell. So the price had to be right. From June to Sunday night, both sides eventually became "more comfortable" with the $4 billion valuation, according to my insiders. A little math shows that Perlmutter, who owns 37% of his public company, stands to reap $1.5 billion in cash and stock. Sources tell me that this sell-out has been Perlmutter's strategy all along. "This was always an acquisition play for Ike," one insider explains to me. "This deal with Disney just ups his game and creates shareholder value and lets him walk away a billionaire."
Content-wise, the two moguls agreed that Marvel would continue to operate independently of the notoriously micro-managing Disney in the same way that Miramax did under the Weinstein Brothers. Though that probably won't make even hardcore fanboys feel better about the deal they're pissing on all over the Internet yesterday and today. (Given what Iger likes to refer to as the "combustion of digital word of mouth" that operates these days, Iger and Perlmutter have their work cut out for them trying to get skeptical fanboys to believe that Disney has no intention of altering the creative approach which Marvel takes to its comic books and movies. Of course, it helps the corporate confluence between the two companies that Marvel's movie fare has been and will be "PG-13".)
Every subsequent meeting between Iger and Perlmutter took place in NY. Finally, it was late Sunday night, very late, that the deal was done. There was no celebration. Both moguls went back to their respective homes to get ready for Monday's early morning announcement.
One more thing you should know: I've learned that, for the past 2 months, Iger has been reading the new Marvel Encyclopedia to soak up the backstories of all the Marvel characters and comics.


Thank you, Nikki. This is the article I was waiting to read.
Disney Buys Miramax, company destroyed and worthless- Check
Disney bought Comic Book Company Crossgen, company never publicshed again
Disney bought Muppets, I don’t know I haven’t seen them mentioned anywhere again
Disney buys Marvel- Congrats DC and Image!
Oh, me! me! me! *raises hand*
I believe the final paragraph if Bob Iger can tell me about the origin of Longshot! Or who Ann Nocenti is. And what Longshot parodied!
And no, Wikipedia is not allowed …
If Disney wants this deal to pay off, they should stay out of the creative process. Marvel has some really talented writers. As long as they’re given free reign, the company will continue to succeed.
Did not know THIS iger was related to THAT Iger; have always wondered if Mike Eisner was related to Will (the top award in American comics is named “The Eisner”)
Great reporting, Nikki. Great deal for Ike, maybe not so good for Disney. Is there really a bottomless desire for what are basically formulaic superhero tales, 6,900 of which have been pretty much C level material even in the comic book world? Time will tell.
@ beatroot…good points indeed. And don’t let anybody whine how brilliant Disney was to buy Pixar. They had to! Can you imagine the stress in the Burbank boardroom if Pixar had gone to Fox or anywhere else, especially after Disney had reaped a fortune by working with Pixar?
Oh please BEATROOT. In the age of Iger, they’ve bought Pixar and learned not to micro-manage. With Perlmutter ascertaining that he wants to remain in charge at Marvel, it sounds like Iger will be comfortable letting Marvel be Marvel until they stop making him money.
The Punisher is one of a handful of popular Marvel characters who don’t make sense in PG-13; all he does in every story is murder criminals. Last December’s Punisher: War Zone was not a box office success, but it was the first and only film to date to feature a “Marvel Knights” logo instead of the standard Marvel brand–”Marvel Knights” being the name of a comics line from about 10 years ago that was conceived as a place for more “R-rated” stories featuring characters like The Punisher.
The character Daredevil was conceived as a kind of Spider-Man clone but came to be redefined in the 80s by a run of stories by Frank “Sin City/300/Dark Knight Returns” Miller. The unrated director’s cut of the 2003 Daredevil film features a level of violence appropriate to an adaptation of Miller.
Wolverine, who is also tied to some famous Miller-written comics, makes sense in an “R” rated film. His defining features are his claws, which he uses to stab people. Even the Wolverine material in the PG-13 X-Men 2 was more violent than this year’s PG-13 X-Men Origins: Wolverine.
There’s also the huge success of the Blade films, which are blood-soaked action-horror.
Most of these characters are born from 70s-80s trend towards “darker, grittier” material–the same period that produced the type of Batman you see in Chris Nolan’s films. If they choose, Marvel can continue to pursue R-rated adaptations of comics like these to attract that older audience. (They might have the rights to Blade back by now, but Wolverine and Daredevil remain at Fox and Punisher is at Lionsgate.) The “Marvel Knights” logo could be a step in the direction of deciding how to handle branding the splatter pictures versus kid-friendly Iron Man/Avengers fare.
They have the option of sidestepping the more violent vigilante characters altogether, and they could try to keep their horror characters PG-13 by taking a more restrained, “classic” approach akin to the old Universal/Hammer pics. We’ll have no real idea of what’s up until they start announcing films for 2013 and beyond.
Good article Nikki, this kind of thing is what we have historically come here for. Let things like the academy’s snub in their news release go…you have to accept the fact that you’ve made enemies….
Great article as always, Ms. Finke.
Another thing to realize, as I mentioned on my own blog, is that this deal gives Marvel, besides a financial cushion for its live action films, the opportunity to branch out to television (ABC needs some hits after Lost is done — imagine a HEROES type show with familiar characters from the Marvel Universe) and feature-length animation. Everyone mentions Pixar, and maybe Pixar will stick to original content, but now they can add Marvel action figures in a Toy Story sequel or feature some Marvel superheroes in an Incredibles sequel. And remember, Disney has a pretty good history of making feature-length animated films — it’s probably adapted every single fairytale, so what better way to revive its stature in the world of animation than by adapting some Marvel stories, which are arguably the fairytales of our modern society?
beatroot, you forgot disney bought pixar, and their last feature made some bank.
What’s funny to me is when you mention the fanboys… you were right!
For the first time in a long time when logged on in World of Warcraft last night, the Global Trade channel was not filled with the usual Chuck Norris vs. Bruce Banter or with the usual “mom” jokes….
It was filled with discussion about the Disney acquisition, the death of Marvel, and — invariably — how Chuck Norris would kick Iger’s ass.
Thanks Nikki, that is such an amazing story – no one else would have known there was more than meets the eye and dug the roots but you! It’s truly awesome.
BeatRoot when Disney bought the Jim Henson Company, they had to agree to honor all of Henson’s pre-existing licensing deals, film production & TV distribution agreements. Waiting for years ‘til those rights ultimately reverted back to The Walt Disney Company’s control. Only in the past year has Disney been in a position to start taking full advantage of Kermit & the other Muppets. Which is why you are now seeing these characters more at Disney World. They also have a promo campaign at Disneyland, and a new Halloween TV special as well as a Muppet theatrical release being in the works for 2010. This was back in 2004 and now 5 years later you are seeing these licenses reverting back to Disney, I would expect a 5 – 10 year timeline for some of the Marvel licenses that are tied up.
There are several specific books from Marvel that would work well on TV: Bendis’ “Alias,” Slott’s “She-Hulk,” Dwayne McDuffie’s “Damage Control.” A few years ago, Bendis established a kind of miniature TV universe with the cast from Daredevil, Alias, Luke Cage/Iron Fist: all street-level characters who wouldn’t involve tons of expensive effects. It’s too bad Daredevil is at Fox and Luke Cage is at Sony.
Matt- Pixar basically WAS Disney anyway. And they are making them do John Carter of Mars with no violence and no bare breasts. Pointless
Terrific reporting. Looks like you covered just about every significant point on the deal.
Ezrha Jean Black
Los Angeles 90027
Everyone mentions the marquee characters but if Disney can turnaround even minor characters as was done to Blade, then their Marvel play is money in the bank.
CST, It is my understanding that Will Eisner and Michael Eisner are NOT related.
Very informative. The Marvel brand is not going to be tainted by this. The Max series and Ultimate line will remain untouched. For Marvel they’re just going to exploit the distribution pipeline services that Disney has to offer. And having them team up with Pixar could only yield good results IMO. I just wish they would take away the Fantastic Four property from Fox before Rothman shits on that bed as he’s done twice before. Miracles do happen.
What a great read. I don’t know any of the Marvel characters, but I’m just glad there will be derivative movies made from obscure comic books instead of derivative movies made from old television shows.
For awhile.
No one yet realizes what Avengers is going to be. Marvel can describe it, but no one believes them. It’s Iron Man 3, though it’s not called Iron Man 3…plus Captain America, Thor, Nick Fury, probably The Hulk. There’s no precedent for this in Hollywood, who can only understand the “crossover” film in terms of horror movies: Frankenstein Meets the Wolfman, Godzilla vs King Kong, Alien vs Predator.
Nikki — There is an aspect here you’ve not covered. Which is Disney’s inability to mine the Princess fantasy. The WSJ has reported on how Disney tried to groom replacements for Miley Cyrus, with Demi Lovato and Selena Gomez, but found little growth there (the hoped for Hispanic audience never materialized, prefering native Spanish language stuff from Mexico). The princess fantasy factory finding huge pressure from parents downsizing spending (no more $100 Miley Cyrus concert tickets) and the Disney folks failing … EPIC-wise, in trying to appeal to boys.
The “Kid Whisperer” was good at teasing out what girls like in princess fantasies, but Disney found to its utter shock (and this demonstrates how clueless the execs are) that the Jonas Brothers and High School the Musical did not appeal to boys.
Buying Marvel is not just content, Disney clearly hopes to appeal to boys. The problem is … the current crop of Comic books don’t appeal to boys. The media age of readers is around 40 or so, according to Marvel’s last Annual Report, and anyone who spent five minutes in a comic book shop of which there are relatively few can confirm this. The stuff is older, “edgy” in a way that is deeply unappealing to boys, and concerned mostly with political correctness instead of the themes that boys like: being brave and powerful, being a good/natural leader of others, getting the girl.
Some of the comic book writing in the last ten years has been astonishingly good. But almost none of it has any more appeal to your average ten year old boy than the Jonas Brothers. At the worst, the writing is derivative, cliched, and dated.
Disney is paying about $4 billion, plus undetermined billions to get the rights to Fantastic Four, X-Men, Spider-Man, etc., and that’s it. The current Marvel writers are talented, but are not going to appeal to young men and boys, that’s for sure. Marvel Publishing operations (Comic books) generally accounts for about 17% of Marvels revenue, so it’s not like there’s much money in the operations of the comic books. Comic books *COULD* make money from Disney’s investment, if they were available everywhere, unlike now where they are restricted to comic shops, priced far cheaper (average price now, around $5 a copy) and written for a young male readership. I just don’t have any confidence that anyone at Marvel or Disney has the experience, background, and ability to create content or manage same aimed at boys.
There’s clearly a lot of boy’s money on the table, but I don’t think Disney-Marvel will pick it up.
News now that Jon Favreau will potentially direct Downey in “Cowboys and Aliens” for Dreamworks after he finishes Iron Man 2. Problem is, he’s supposed to start work on Avengers after Iron Man 2. How much better is the deal Dreamworks is offering him? Will Marvel realize that they need Favreau on this and pay up?
@nemo
in regards to Marvel needing Favreau for Avengers, I don’t think so, as a producer and creative consultant sure, but he doesn’t NEED to direct Avengers. We still need to see what Thor and Captain America does, to see the full scope of vision needed to mesh all these properties together. I think it would be best to get a new director, what’s Neill Blomkamp up to these days. Plus if paramount wants Iron Man 3, it would be best to let Favreau move away from it, to get a breather. But really, this whole deal hinges on if Iron Man 2 steps up, then Thor and then Captain America. I think as long as 2 of the 3 make bank, Marvel can pick and choose who they want to bring the Epicness taht Avengers needs to teh big screen.
I read trade news because I NEED to. When you write it, it’s because I WANT to. You add that extra dimension that makes info entertainment.
Intresting read but I´m still very nervous about this deal. The comparsions with Pixar or the Tarantino movies don´t work in my opinion. Pixar always made nice,(and slightly preachy) movies aimed at a very young audience – perfect Disney stuff. And the Tarantino and some of the other Miramax and Touchstone flicks are violent and cynic but not extremly expensive and never reach such a broad audience as tentpole movies do.
And here lies the true problem. Is anyone remembering the stories how shocked the Disney execs reacted about the first Pirates of the Caribbean movie? And how hard Bruckenheimer had to fight to keep the movie intact? The describtion is, he had to “protect” the writers from Disney. And this was Bruckenheimer- Disney´s hen which laid golden eggs.(And someone may wonder if the so much lower quality of the sequels had something to do with Disney forcing their ideas on Bruckenheimer.)
How do people think will Disney deal with the directors and producers which make supposed tentpole flicks with budgets of 150 miillion dollar or more who were not part of their company for years. Does really anyone think that Disney would allow anymore risky decicions as giving a older actor like RDJ or Edward Norton the lead in a superhero tentpole flick?
Or does anyone think that the humour (or Tony Stark´s playboy livestyle or the political stuff) in Iron Man or the way General Ross had been shown in the Incredible Hulk, fits with what Disney wants from their high budget tentpole flicks?
Iger talked about how Disney is strong with the stuff for girls and wants Marvel to be something similar for the boys marked segment.And that he says boys and not males or just broader audience,gives I think a good idea what the future will bring for the Marvel movies: adapting the Hannah Montana/High School Musical formula (absolut-lowest-common-denominator-plots and very young inexperineced actors to make the movies tailorfit for pre-teens)to the action movie genre.
Iger may say he will not meddle with Marvel but it´s hard to believe that someone is paying $4 Billion and don´t want have control over his acquistion.
@beatroot – to be fair, Disney only bought the IP of Crossgen’s titles. The company had been pretty much dormant after Mark Alessi ran it into the ground near the end. You could talk to any of the various former Crossgen employees about how badly that company was handled if you want some real eye-opening discussions.
However, getting back to the topic at hand – I was worried at first about this deal, but Bob Iger’s made some smart moves in the last few years since taking over as CEO at Disney. From the Pixar merger to putting John Lassiter in charge of Disney’s animation division, dismantling the strategic unit and putting control back into the business units where it belongs, Iger’s made more positive than negative moves in my opinion. This deal with Marvel just seems to underscore the point that content is king in Iger’s eyes, and he wants to grow Disney’s content portfolio. You could do worse than Marvel, which has over 70 years of character history that Disney can draw from for their various media platforms.
And thanks, Nikki, for the little history lesson. I wasn’t aware of the connection before.
Quote from Irene
‘Iger may say he will not meddle with Marvel but it´s hard to believe that someone is paying $4 Billion and don´t want have control over his acquisition.’
Agreed, if I had spent 4 Billion bucks buying a known franchise, no chance in hell I’m gonna leave it as it is.
Marvel allows certain usage rights to Universal Studios Islands of Adventure for their Marvel Island…. what happens now?
Saying good by to Marvel… Ironman will be saving the snow white from know!!!
Great article. A quick comment to BeatRoot. Crossgen had already declared or was in the process of declaring bankruptcy when Disney started negotiations to buy it. The company went under because the owner Mark Alessi was overly ambitious and tried to grow too fast, while the company had failed to produce any major hits or popular characters, which may be why Disney has not done anything with the characters.
Great article, and super great point on Miramax/Disney.
I keep trying to calm the fanboys down by pointing out that forcing Marvel to “clean up” would actually be BAD for Disney. The haterade levels are getting pretty astounding.
Maybe there’s more to this Iger sanction of Marvel than meets the cynical eye or turns an almighty buck. Maybe McCracken’s vision of a Chief Culture Officer has taken root in Burbank and what happens next demands excruciating scrutiny.
Two words: “Secret Wars”
With Disney and Pixar, this can now be made into a features film series or cable miniseries economically where you could get the acting talent, but not have to tie them up for months of location shooting.
The mind reels at the possibilities.
What seems to go unmentioned so far is Jon Favreau’s tremendous contribution to the valuation of Marvel. How much does anyone suppose Marvel was worth the day after Ang Lee’s Hulk opened? Favreau demonstrated that with the right mix of respect for the source material, inspired casting, and good old fashioned Hollywood adaptive storytelling, even Marvel’s second and third string can be made into contemporary blockbusters that are franchise-ready. Whether he’s the guy they keep going back to or not, he’s definitely the guy that drew the map. I hope he had Marvel stock options in his deal.
Perlmutter had zero interest in Marvel as a media property until Arad show him the light. Ike bought the company for the toy license and lucked into the movie biz because of Arad. Anyone who has actually studied Ike’s business knows he always looking to sell and this time, his back was against the wall. Someone was going to buy Marvel before Iron Man 2’s opening because they don’t have the funds for Thor or any other self-financed projects. Disney bit and now they’re going to have to go to war with Fox, Sony and Universal to get the rest of the characters back under control. That’s the real story.
great new site, love the navigation….