Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple's Purchase of Beats May Not Be Finalized Until Next Week
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Is there a leaked mockup of what the possible new Beats by Dre logo will now look like?
Just trying to have some fun..It's been a long day
Just trying to have some fun..It's been a long day
Ahhh there's the daily Beats article. Been waiting since the daily iPhone 6 mockup article. Now I can sleep soundly.
What a waste!!
This is a colossal waste of cash. Headphones that cost $5 to make being sold for hundreds. Sorry but this company has no real value to it.
No audiophile thinks Beats "headphones" are worth the high price. A $30 pair of Sony's are better. All hype with cute packaging.
As an Apple shareholder you are just watching Cook burn money.
Huffpo:
This is a colossal waste of cash. Headphones that cost $5 to make being sold for hundreds. Sorry but this company has no real value to it.
No audiophile thinks Beats "headphones" are worth the high price. A $30 pair of Sony's are better. All hype with cute packaging.
As an Apple shareholder you are just watching Cook burn money.
Huffpo:
Last edited:
This buyout will keep haunting me until Apple finally mentions or releases a product that has do with Beats. I still don't see the relevance of this once niche headphone maker. Perplexed, but interested to see what goes down at WWDC this year pertaining to Beats (if it is mentioned at all).
It's like buying Kodak. It's basically a well-known brand with uninteresting products.
Maybe we'll see stuff like a Beats camera, running iOS and made with cheap plastic.
Maybe we'll see stuff like a Beats camera, running iOS and made with cheap plastic.
Assuming you're right, knowing how to sell cheap, crappy products for large amounts is an incredible skill, and it's worth a lot. I too believe their products are extremely overpriced, just like B&O's and Bose's. Nobody would claim that these companies have no value. The value may be in the brand and marketing alone, not technology, but so what? The same can be said about B&O or Bose; they have mediocre products that sell for 10 times what similar products cost. Are these companies worthless?
As an Apple shareholder, I'm watching people commenting over a rumor. If Cook indeed decides to purchase Beats, I will expect a justification for it, and I'm quite sure I'll see one.
Am I the only one who's picturing Dr. Dre in one of those Apple retail shirts standing at a Genius Bar?
That's one of my pet peeves too. Must admit, I didn't have the nerve to point it out.
Lol you are just making up dumb stuff and posting it on the interweb.
----------
It has been beaten to death why they would make this deal. It is a pretty no brain deal for apple with a lot of upside and little risk. It is certainly better than buying nest or whatsapp or Motorola. From a risk standpoint it is a better investment than occulus.
Perhaps you have chosen to ignore all the previous discussions on the issue. On the business that BEATS runs right now, as is, 3.2 billion is a good deal. There doesn't need to be something in the pipeline to justify it. It is justified by the most basic business facts, which is not close to any of the acquisitions I mentioned above.
Yes huffpo is where people go to get business news.
It is pretty hard to find solid investments that will give a 10% roi for billions of dollars. When you have a massive amount of cash you thank your lucky stars if you can invest in a successful money making business with that kind of return. Risk free investment with potential large upside? This is all good news for apple stockholders.
Anyone who thinks this is burning money for shareholders probably should not be invested in the stock market as it is unlikely they can afford to do so.
This real is a no brainer deal for apple, yet I continue to be amused by the people who apparently don't even meet that requisite talking about what a bad deal it is without any factual basis.
Let us put it in the simplest terms. Say you got 150k to invest (come on guys stop laughing it could happen). Now you have an opportunity to spend 3k on a business that will earn you between $200-$400 a year. I don't know if you have checked the interest rates at banks lately but you are going to get only a tenth of that. In fact a one year cd is less than a quarter of one percent or 1/40th the return you would get by investing your 3k into this mini beats.
See how it is a no brainer? Leave out the fact apple has sold hundreds of millions of headphone jacks or that the foundation for a streaming music service is there. It is a no brainer as a financial investment even if they were selling Tupperware.
Now you are going to wring your hands about this 3k investment when you have to find a way to earn money with the other 147k? The reality is the opportunity to buy successful businesses at a reasonable price is virtually non existent. It is not like there are billion dollar companies with great net earnings that want to be purchased for modest multiples just laying around out there.
I agree with You. I tried Beats one , I was not impressed at all...Seems like an overpriced piece of plastics sold with a ,,Big Name".
I could have been more delighted Apple teaming up with other brands if not even making a move as an acquisition, brands which proved way more in design, quality and performance than Beats themselves. I think of brands like Bang&Olufsen , Bowers&Wilkins ...but Im sure the list could go on and there are brands 10x the quality and design than those Beats plastics.
Im not a hater, though Hip Hop or Dre is not my style, but again its the product itself which does not meet my expectations.
Viktor
They own 70% of the high end market and over 35% of the total market. They are not a niche headphone maker. They are the dominant headphone maker. And just to reiterate for the thousandth time, apple sells tons of devices with headphone jacks.
"beaten" ha ha.
Yes, a lot of people have been saying there'd have to be "no brain" involved to buy Beats for the presumed price. It's not that there's no value there, even if the value is mostly in the marketing, it's just hard to see how it's worth that much. And saying it's better than two other bad deals is not what it should be judged by.
----------
Ok, in your simplest terms, let's say you could develop the equivalent of the $3k business on your own for $300. Why would you spend $3k instead of $300? Only reasons are you need it now, and can't wait to develop your own. But hard to see how that applies here. Apple has no need to hurry up and make crappy overpriced headphones (they already sell them, so making them would be the only change), and since this deal can only be about the streaming business, why do they need to hurry up and get 111,000 subscribers when they'd have that many in an hour after releasing thier own service? Apple can find people to curate playlists just as well as Beats can.
As others have said, they must be thinking something if they do this, and they'll have to say what that is, but unless it's some surprise no one has mentioned yet (or the price is much less), I'm sticking with overpriced.
Any delay is good news
As long as it's not completed there's always a chance it won't happen, so any delay is good news. There could be lots of deal-breakers with this; hopefully one of them is unresolvable.
As long as it's not completed there's always a chance it won't happen, so any delay is good news. There could be lots of deal-breakers with this; hopefully one of them is unresolvable.
I miss the days when Apple had the word "Computer" as part of their company name (and their mission). Apple seems to have lost their way, seeking the almighty quick buck instead of the tried-but-true and seemingly faithful customer base.
Fortunately, they can't rename themselves Apple Music, since someone already beat them to it. (Hurray for hindsight!)
Fortunately, they can't rename themselves Apple Music, since someone already beat them to it. (Hurray for hindsight!)
Really don't think that's what happened; I think it was circumstantial.
I genuinely feel that the 5C did not sell as well for the same reason that the 4 didn't sell as well after the 4S was released : The 5C was the iPhone 5. People didn't buy the 5S over the 5C because of the 5C's plastic shell, they bought the 5S because it was the next and newest generation of iPhone, opposed to the 5C which was last generation's iPhone in a new outfit.
Rather than saying people didn't buy the 5C because it has a plastic shell, it seems more logical to say that people didn't go out and
1.) Increase sales of the iPhone 5 just because it now comes in colors, and
2.) Choose the iPhone 5 over the new 5S model because the iPhone 5 now comes in colors.
If the 5C was the 5S in a plastic shell, I bet you that majority of sales would be on the 5C side; I don't think people care that much about the plasticity, more so than they just prefer better specs.