Yeah - but the parent company didn't make a distinction about startups - just big evil companies acquiring smaller ones.

A very good point. Pixar is notably a huge fan of Ghibli studios, which has ventured into less child-friendly fare in the past. But they have always been a big proponent of universal stories, stories which do not demean children nor sacrifice their integrity to subtextually cater to adults. I would bet that they would be making the same movies that they are now, but Disney would not have released Frozen (as a childless 20-something duder, I was absolutely ecstatic watching that old-style Disney musical.)

> Actually, it was the other way around: Pixar took over Disney and they kept both names going, but the entirety of Pixar's management team replaced their counterparts at Disney. Sounds to me like Pixar did the taking over there.

Yeah, corporate acquisitions are often not in substance what they are superficially described as...in technical terms, Disney "bought" Pixar, but they did so entirely with Disney stock, $7.4 billion dollars worth, and made Steve Jobs by far Disney's largest single shareholder, and, while Pixar remained a distinct entity within Disney, much of Disney's management was replaced with Pixar management (who retained their roles in Pixar, as well.)