Gates ready to bankroll Disney battle (http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/business/articles/timid74352?source=) - Evening Standard, 2/15/04

QuikQuote:
Bill Gates is poised to play kingmaker in Comcast's bid for entertainment giant Walt Disney. The Microsoft chairman is likely to step in to sweeten Comcast's takeover offer after Disney shareholders made it clear they would not accept the cable TV group's initial all-share offer, which valued the Magic Kingdom at $66 billion (£35 billion).
Microsoft's $3 billion, or 7.4%, stake in Comcast makes it the biggest outside shareholder. Gates appears willing to dip into Microsoft's $53 billion cash pile to clinch the deal. Microsoft insiders have played down rumours that it might offer a rival bid for Comcast, but have not denied speculation that Gates could increase his stake in the company to add cash to the deal.

Gates is said to have developed a good working relationship with Brian Roberts, head of Comcast...If Eisner could have just developed a good working relationship with anybody...

Oh, I forgot. The Board of Directors.

Anyone other than me not want Bill Gates in any kind of ownership role of Disney whatsoever?

Wait a minute. Didn't Disney and Microsoft announce some kind of deal last week to develop new software or something like that?

What the heck is happening here?

Microsoft can't even keep Windows security breaches closed before they release new operating systems. Every couple of weeks a new breach is discovered requiring a patch of some sort, or an upgrade. And we're to trust Mickey with Microsoft??? Or am I naive about this prospect?

Originally posted by 3IdAlienKid
Wait a minute. Didn't Disney and Microsoft announce some kind of deal last week to develop new software or something like that?

What the heck is happening here?

I'm totally confused on this point, too. A week ago, Eisner was crowing about their new relationship with Microsoft and this week Gates is plunging the knife in Mikey's back. What up with that?

Does it have anything to do with trying to muscle Steve Jobs out of any future picture?

Originally posted by blusilva
...
Does it have anything to do with trying to muscle Steve Jobs out of any future picture?

Bingo!

Originally posted by blusilva
I'm totally confused on this point, too. A week ago, Eisner was crowing about their new relationship with Microsoft and this week Gates is plunging the knife in Mikey's back. What up with that?

Does it have anything to do with trying to muscle Steve Jobs out of any future picture?

Why not? Microsoft buys more of Comcast, Comcast takes over Disney, Microsoft then becomes a major shareholder of the resulting company, which gives him more power to dictate what happens with the Disney division.

Well, Gates owning Disney certainly isn't going to help relations with Pixar...

I'd rather see all of the Disney holdings go out of business and liquidate than see Microsloth (actually, I prefer an earthier term, one involving a Yiddish word for the male reproductive anatomy) own so much as a single ODV cart at a Disney theme park.

I just read an editorial in Friday's edition of the LA times that basically said even though Disney is no beauty, Comcast is a Beast. They go one to compare the way Disney treats it's employees with regard to fairness and Unionization which is good compared to Comcast. They pay their employees lower wages than any of the other cable companies and don't treat them very well at all.

I am having second thoughts about Comcast owning Disney. Haven't our pour overworked, underpaid Disney Cast Members been through enough?

Microsoft is publically denying any intention of getting involved in the takeover:

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-flan22feb22,1,3448042.column?coll=la-utilities-business

Not that rules it out. It also doesn't fit MS's pattern in the past of only buying out small start up companies to get cheap access to their technology, or taking small stakes in larger companies to form partnerships.

By the way, the deal between MS and Disney was for Disney to license MS's DRM (digital rights management) technology for digitized film distribution. It's not a mature technology yet, and may not prove to be practical in the long run. Here's an article that gives the basics:

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4220833/