Ludicrous Speed
Banned
Yep, really dumb decision if you ask me.
Apple in talks for $3.2bn Beats deal
- Thread starter Dawg
- Start date
- Status
Yep, really dumb decision if you ask me.
mynameismyname
Banned
Apple is *being* paralysed by the record industry, and this move isn't helping them whatsoever in that regard.
Thursday War
Banned
In terms of popularity and mainstream appeal? Absolutely. Beats by Dre have been the spiritual successor to iPhone earbuds for a while now - if you travel a lot internationally then you know this to be true.
If this acquisition goes through, then a few things immediately come to mind:
1) Wireless listening technology might be central to future Apple products.
2) You might want to pay attention to V-Moda, B&W and Bose. Big moves like this tend to 'inspire' changes in other companies.
3) Expect an evolution in what headphones can and can't do. For example, high-end headphones that have built-in heating technology might become commonplace. Headmuffs done right.
Aquamarine
Member
Overpriced, overhyped, and not all that much better than cheaper equivalences.
You underestimate the value of style.
And really they were the first to do it on any large scale.
yes they sound like dried poo
zephervack
Member
While I agree that Beats are an overpriced product with shitty quality, you have to realize that this acquisitions happen not because of the product it self but because of following they have achieved.
Same thing with Instagram/WhatsApp and Facebook, you think a couple of Facebook engineers cant write the Instagram/WhatsApp Apps in a couple of weeks and maybe even make it better, of course they can, but what the are buying is the brand/userbase. End of story, when Sennheiser/Audio Technica/ Shure have the same level of marketing as Beats, thats when they will get bought.
In the business world no one gives a shit about audio quality.
Same thing with Instagram/WhatsApp and Facebook, you think a couple of Facebook engineers cant write the Instagram/WhatsApp Apps in a couple of weeks and maybe even make it better, of course they can, but what the are buying is the brand/userbase. End of story, when Sennheiser/Audio Technica/ Shure have the same level of marketing as Beats, thats when they will get bought.
In the business world no one gives a shit about audio quality.
I'm not convinced. The record industry wants there to be competition, so I'm sure it's giving the other services good terms, but Apple can grow a market for them and give them an awful lot of money. If Apple *wants* to launch a streaming music service, it could do it. The engineering infrastructure is nearly there for them anyway. They probably have better metadata than anyone. The only question is if the terms it would get are efficient to be very profitable.
But even if the streaming rights were included, $3.2 billion puts an equal dent in your margins as uncompetitive terms do. And the streaming rights almost certainly aren't included, so they've still got the same problem.
mynameismyname
Banned
exactly.
Plus, most of the infrastructure is there anyway, in the shape of iTunes Radio, which is pretty damn good for what it is, but obviously doesn't hold a candle to Rdio or Spotify.
I'm no Apple fanboy but I don't get it when people always say "lol Apple, overhyped and overprice."
Sure, there's an argument for overpriced. But don't most review sites consistently rank the iphone/ipad/macs as superior to their competitors? Don't i products do many things that are objectively better than alternatives?
Sure, there's an argument for overpriced. But don't most review sites consistently rank the iphone/ipad/macs as superior to their competitors? Don't i products do many things that are objectively better than alternatives?
The iPhone is definitely overpriced, it's not that impressive compared to most flagship smartphones
Baron Doggystyle von Woof
Member
This. You don't need this Apple.
I would buy Tesla with a 100 billion dollar war chest.
People have been saying that about Apple for, what, 30 years? It's nothing new. Apple doesn't sell any cheap versions of their main products and they have a history of putting more emphasis on branding than other PC makers in their history.
There's always a core group of people that do not see any value in the software or hardware design that Apple does differently (I say better) than other companies in the space and they only look at specs. In that sense, Apple will always be overpriced to them.
I have to admit that I feel much the same way about beats (and bose) that those other people feel about Apple. Beats produces a decent sounding 450 dollar headphone that you can get from Sennheiser (almost surely with better SQ) for, like, 200 or 300. But beats has good branding and a popular bass heavy sound and an evocative style.
The beats headphones for 250ish (their on ear ones) are really awful, at any price.
I can't imagine Apple is buying beats for the headphones. I mean, it's a part of it but the long play has got be the streaming service.
mynameismyname
Banned
This is the meanest thing posted in this thread so far.
ProfessorX
Unconfirmed Member
When people talk about Apple and overpriced they constantly ignore the following factors: top notch software, excellent interconnectivity with the Apple ecosystem, ridiculously great customer service, top notch build quality, the "it just works" factor, and that they so often seem to figure out exactly how to make things that people want to use...
Well we have reports such as
Apple wants the people and foundation.
Edit: Who knows, maybe they wanna start a record label.
He's already celebrating it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=guMFKBXp544
Ban Puncher
Member
Friends don't let friends buy Bose Beats.
Although I'm starting to come around to the Apple laptops as being worth the extra cost I don't see the obsession with beats. Not like they have a superior OS or able to accept Unix commands elegantly in their console. They're just really, really expensive headphones with a red cord.
For some people the extra cost justifies the value. My cousin had some and he kept telling me how great they were and how much they cost. Kept emphasizing how much better they were than any headphones I had (he has no idea what headphones I have) For most people these are the most expensive headphones they have ever seen and top of the line. I pulled up an audiophile website and showed him some $1000 grados lol. I think he shit a brick.
George Claw M.D.
Member
If it only appealed to rich kids, Beats wouldn't be so successful. It has mainstream appeal. It achieved that rare status that all products hope to reach, being an overpriced luxury item that people still want and save their money for. Same with Jordan sneakers. Sells to all income ranges, including poor ass kids who save every dime to afford a pair.
I can understand that. Before I truly learned about quality clothing I thought that designer labels like 7FAM, Diesel and brands like that had better quality than a $30 pair of jeans. I was very, very mistaken. Often times blindly trusting MSRP and equating it to quality is foolish.
lmao well played.
mynameismyname
Banned
There is inherent value in design, though. If that justifies the markup, is obviously up to every individual.
It's a fashion accessory. It's not that hard to understand.
they basically took Apple's white iPod earbuds to the next level.
An acquisition doesn't affect margins, and it's likely that Beats already is a high margin company. How would you value a company with over $1 billion revenue per year selling high-margin accessories?
Liu Kang Baking A Pie
Member
Guys, is Beats overpriced and overhyped?
This is the first joke in this thread that actually made me laugh.
arts&crafts
Member
Dang guys got save up for those BEATS by DRE!
br0ken_shad0w
Member
No, no, not before I buy the ATH-AD2000X.
Chad Kroeger as Apple though??
On the face of it, I don't get it. It would seem like most of the value of Beats is in the brand, but Apple has their own (even stronger) brand. If Apple wants to sell expensive headphones, they're perfectly capable of creating their own. There's the music streaming service, which has (effectively, relative to Apple scale) no customers, and I have trouble imagining is some technical marvel beyond what Apple could do. Maybe they'd be acquiring some kind of talent/deals? I don't know.
It will be interesting to hear analysis of the deal should it happen.
It will be interesting to hear analysis of the deal should it happen.
tokyostomp
Banned
This may affect my career.
Interesting....
Interesting....
I wasn't talking about hardware margins - I just cannot believe for a second Apple doesn't think if it wanted to build expensive bulky headphones with a nice margin it couldn't.
I was referring to margins on a streaming service. As in, even if you accepted the rights transferred (which they couldn't), Apple could buy the rights themselves from the labels, and while their margins might be cut because the labels would charge them a little more, it would still be much less than $3.2 billion to do so.
If they wanted to buy or just build a streaming service, I bet they could. Beats commands 60% of the $100+ headphone market. How long do you think it would take for Apple to get there, especially with a growing competitor in Beats, which quintupled revenue in 2 years? I don't know why you choose to ignore the hardware part of the equation when it is the larger part of the company being purchased.
Apple's Elop.
I don't think it would take them long at all, but more importantly I don't think Apple give a stuff about the $100+ headphone market. Apple don't touch a bunch of other accessory markets which would command healthy margins and of similar size, such as game controllers. The entire market is a small distraction for them.
Heck, I suspect Apple sells a disturbing amount of it's dual driver In-ear headphones, which are truly awful (fragile as all hell and with no base at all), without even trying.
EDIT: Best analysis I've seen so far. http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/...ay-nasty-things-about-policemen-2014050986412
lastflowers
Banned
the long con!
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
I have to say I don't really get the value add here. I mean $3 billion is nothing to Apple, they could make an acquisition like this every quarter and it wouldn't impact their war chest at all, so it's not like a "bad" move or whatever... it's just a confusing one.
Beats' streaming service does not add significant value, and there's no way there's infrastructure or tech there that's useful to Apple. Apple might not have a particularly good streaming service themselves, but they have infrastructure and engineering capacity (IE they could easily build one).
There's nothing about Beats headphones that are notably high quality; does anyone really think that absent this acquisition, Apple couldn't build headphones in the product categories that Beats does?
The brand could be valuable, it appears to have pretty significant pull among teens to twentysomethings, but it just seems a little bit like a weird fit for Apple, which basically never acquires external products and keeps their external branding. I think if Apple was selling Beats as Beats, that would be a big change for the company.
Beats' streaming service does not add significant value, and there's no way there's infrastructure or tech there that's useful to Apple. Apple might not have a particularly good streaming service themselves, but they have infrastructure and engineering capacity (IE they could easily build one).
There's nothing about Beats headphones that are notably high quality; does anyone really think that absent this acquisition, Apple couldn't build headphones in the product categories that Beats does?
The brand could be valuable, it appears to have pretty significant pull among teens to twentysomethings, but it just seems a little bit like a weird fit for Apple, which basically never acquires external products and keeps their external branding. I think if Apple was selling Beats as Beats, that would be a big change for the company.
Not "not all that much better" but there are actually tons of headphones out there that are actually better! People are just buying it as a fashion statement. If they want good sound quality there are tons of choices out there and save you a lot of cash too.
Fox Mulder
Member
HTC tried to make it work, even building phones around the brand. It's a noble idea to improve sound quality from a phone, but most people don't give a shit.
HTC had to sell their share in the company because their company is dying. Samsung is beating their ass in android.
Game controllers do $1 billion+/year in revenue? Madcatz had less than $130 million revenue last year, and they don't make it exclusively to 1 system.
Saying that Beats headphones are horrible at any price is being over critical. They're not great headphones but they would be decent enough in a different pricing tier for people who enjoy bass heavy music.
The problem is that Beats markets them like they're the kings of audio quality for any kind of music.
duhhh it's just a fashionista thing for "cool" people just like apple lol
no you're supposed to never have used a pair and then shit on them even though you aren't an audiophile
isn't that how this works?
- Status